<7t: 


-o 


■!|1# 


^Ujy;YSULL£,jy^ 


fIFO% 


C^lLlBRAti!  (y/ 


vilK^^ 


4';/ninvn.jr\- 


Z5^ 


'//V,M^\ 


^/k^vOhMiv']  la 


'-■   A      /■ 


Epochs  of  Modern  History 

EDITED  BY 
EDWARD  E.  MORRIS,  M.A^  J.  SURTEES  PHILLPOTTS,  B.C.L. 

AND 

C.  COLBECK,  M.A. 


THE  EPOCH  OF  REFORM,   1830-50 


JUSTIN   MCCARTHY.   M.  P. 


EPOCHS   OF   ANCIENT    HISTORY. 

Edited  by  Rev.  G.  W.  Cox  and  Charles  Sankev,  M.  A, 
Eleven  volumes,  i6ino,  with  41  Maps  and  Plans.  Price  per 
vol.,  $1.00.    The  set,  Roxburgh  style,  gilt  top,  in  box,  $ti.oa 

Troy — Its   Legend,    History,  and  Literature.    By  S.  G.  W. 

Benjamin. 
The  Greeks  and  the  Persians.     By  G.  W.  Cox. 
The  Athenian  Empire.     By  G.  VV.  Cox. 
The  Spartan  and  Theban  Supremacies.     By  Charles  Sankey. 
The  Macedonian  Empire.     By  A.  M.  Curteis. 
Early  Rome.     By  W.  Ihne. 
Rome  and  Carthage.     By  R.  Bosworth  Smith. 
The  Gracchi,  Marius,  and  Sulla.     By  A.  H.  Beesley. 
The  Roman  Triumvirates.     By  Charles  Merivale. 
The  Early  Empire.    By  W.  Wolfe  Capes. 
The  Aoe  of  the  Antonines.     By  W.  Wolfe  Capes. 

EPOCHS   OF   MODERN    HISTORY. 

Edited  by  Edward  E.  Morris.  Eighteen  volumes,  i6mo, 
with  77  Maps,  Plans,  and  Tables.  Price  per  vol.,  $1.00. 
The  set,  Roxburgh  style,  gilt  top,  in  box,  $18.00. 

The  Beginning  of  the  Middle  Ages.    By  R.  W.  Church. 

The  Normans  in  Europe.    By  A.  H.  Johnson. 

The  Crusades     By  G.  W.  Cox. 

The  Early  Plantagenets.     By  Wm.  Stubbs. 

Edward  III.     By  W.  Warburton. 

The  Houses  of  Lancaster  and  York.     By  James  Gairdner. 

The  Era  of  the  Protestant  Revolution.    By  Frederic  .Seebohm. 

The  Early  Tuoors.     By  C.  E.  Moberiy. 

The  Age  of  Elizabeth.     By  M.  Creighton. 

The  Thirty  Years  War,  ms-tew.     By  .S.  R.  Gardiner. 

The  Puritan  Revolution.     By  S.  R.  Gardiner. 

The  Fall  of  the  Stuarts.     By  Kdward  Hale. 

The  English  Restoration  and  Louis  XIV.    By  Osmond  Airy. 

The  Age  of  Anne.     By  Edward  K.  Morris. 

The  Early  Hanoverians.     Bv  Edward  E.  Morris. 

Frederick  the  Great.    By  F.  W.  Longman. 

The  French  Revolution  and  First  Empire.  By  W.  O'Connoi 
Morris.     Appendix  by  Andrew  D.  White. 

Th«  Epoch  of  Reform,  isso-isso.    By  Justin  Macarthy. 


Epochs  of  Modern  History 


THE 

EPOCH    OF    REFORM 

1830-185O 

STATE  r?  uxm  aL  Dtnuu>^ 

I    '  V->.    >   vrr^r^i    v'c-        -         1 
BY 

JUSTIN  McCarthy,  m.p. 

AtlTHOR     OF     "a     history     OF     OUR     OWN     TIMBS" 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES   SCRIBNER'S  SONS 


\^Q,^ 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arcliive 

in  2007  witli  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


Iittp://www.arcliive.org/details/epocliofreform18300mccaiala 


■     DO 
Mix 
PREFACE, 


The  object  of  this  little  book  is,  in  the  first  instance, 
to  give  a  clear  and  concise  account  of  the  changes  in 
our  political  system,  from  the  introduction  of  Lord 
Grey's  first  Reform  Bill  to  the  death  of  Sir  Robert 
Peel.  That  epoch  of  Reform  encloses  a  group  of 
constitutional  changes  so  important  as  to  entitle  it  to 
a  distinct  place  in  the  history  of  England.  Lord 
Grey's  Reform  Bill  established  the  basis  of  a  popular 
suffrage,  gave  representation  to  the  great  industrial 
towns,  and  abolished  many  old  standing  anomalies  and 
sources  of  corruption.  The  tithe  system  was  brought 
to  an  end  in  Ireland.  Slavery  was  banished  from  our 
colonies  for  ever.  The  working  of  women  and 
children  in  mines  and  factories  was  placed  under 
wholesome  regulation.  The  foundation  of  a  system 
of  national  education  was  laid.  Our  penal  code  was 
made  human  and  reasonable.  The  corn  laws  were 
repealed.  These  changes,  and  others  hardly  less 
important,  are  the  birth  of  that  marvellous  period  of 
political  activity.  Moreover,  during  this  epoch  of 
Reform  the  relations  of  the  Sovereign  to  Parliament, 


vi  Preface. 

and  of  Parliament  to  the  People,  were  established  on  a 
well  defined  and  satisfactory  principle. 

The  manner  in  which  all  these  changes  were 
brought  about  is  a  lesson  of  the  deepest  political 
interest  to  every  student.  I  have  been  especially 
anxious  to  show  how  the  policy  which  opens  the  way 
to  Reform  is  the  true  antidote  to  the  spirit  of  Revolu- 
tion. Some  of  the  grievances  under  which  the 
English  people  suffered  before  this  epoch  of  Reform 
were  severe  enough  to  have  warranted  an  attempt  at 
Revolution,  if  no  other  means  of  relief  seemed  attain- 
able, and  if  that  desperate  remedy  had  some  chance 
of  success.  Revolution,  however,  was  avoided  in 
England  because  English  statesmen  had  learnt  the 
wisdom  which  statesmen  on  the  Continent  had  not 
acquired — the  wisdom  which  teaches  a  Minister  when 
to  make  his  own  opinions  and  prejudices  give  way 
before  the  pressure  of  evidence  and  experience,  and 
of  opinions  that  have  not  yet  become  his  own.  That 
was  the  wisdom  which  English  Ministers  during  that 
epoch  proved  themselves  especially  to  possess.  They 
were  not  for  the  most  part  men  of  great  intellect  or 
political  genius.  Some  of  the  continental  statesmen 
whose  mistakes  and  perversity  brought  misfortune  on 
their  country  were  men  of  higher  intellectual  grasp  than 
some  of  the  English  Ministers  whose  shrewd  sound 
judgment  saved  England  from  the  peril  of  Revolution. 
But  the  manner  in  which  England  was  governed  during 


Preface.  vii 

the  period  I  have  described,  made  it  evident  to  all 
that  every  change  in  our  political  system  needed  for 
the  good  of  the  nation  can  be  x)btained  by  the  patient 
and  persistent  use  of  argument  and  of  reason,  without 
any  thought  of  an  ultimate  appeal  to  force.  This,  in 
itself,  is  the  true  principle  of  political  freedom. 

I  have  endeavoured  to  give  my  readers  something 
like  a  picture  of  each  leading  public  man  on  both 
sides  of  politics  during  this  epoch  of  Reform.  The 
more  vividly  we  can  form  an  impression  as  to  the 
appearance,  the  bearing,  and  the  personal  peculiarities 
of  a  statesman,  the  more  likely  are  we  to  understand 
the  part  he  took  in  public  affairs,  and  the  purposes 
and  principles  which  inspired  him.  The  National 
Portrait  Gallery  in  London  is  a  valuable  instructor 
even  to  the  profoundest  student  of  English  history. 
No  period  of  equal  length  in  that  history  encloses  a 
greater  number  of  remarkable  figures  than  the  states- 
men, orators,  and  politicians  from  Lord  Grey,  Lord 
John  Russell,  and  O'Connell,  to  Sir  Robert  Peel, 
Lord  Palmerston,  and  Mr.  Cobden. 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


PAGB 

1 8 15,    State  of  Europe  after  the  Peace  of  Paris  and  events 

leading  to  Reform  or  Revolution 5 

The  Holy  Alliance  of  Austria,  Russia,  and  Prussia   .    .  9 

England  under  Lord  Liverpool  and  Lord  Castlereagh  .  11 

Repression  of  popular  agitation 16 

1817-19.  The  Blanketeers.     Peterloo,  Orator  Hunt 16 

1822.    Change  of  policy  with  Canning's  accession  to  power    .  11 

1824.    Recognition  of  the  South  American  Republics  ....  11 

1826.  Struggle  of   Greece   for  independence.      The  Great 

Powers  intervene n 

1827.  Battle  of  Navarino 12 

1828.  Repeal  of  the  Test  and  Corporation  Acta a 

1829.  Catholic  Emancipation  Act 32 

Progress  of  the  agitation  for  Reform.     Its  leaders    .    .  25 

1830.  Revolution  in  France.     Charles  X.  abdicates 42 

Death  of  George  IV.     Election  of  a  new  Parliament  .  38 

October  26.  Parliament  meets.    The  Duke  of  Wellington  and 
the  Government  declare  against   Reform  and  are 

forced  to  resign 43 

Lord  Grey's  Reform  Ministry 46 

1831.  March  i.  Lord  John  Russell  introduces  the  Reform  Bill  50 
March  21.  Second  reading  of  the  Bill  carried  by  302  to  301  .  60 

The  Gascoigne  amendment.     Lord  Grey  appeals  to  the 

country 6i 


X  Contents. 

tKCM. 

June  24.  Reform  Bill  introduced  into  the  new  Parliament. 

Prolonged  debates  in  Committee 63 

1831,  August  18.  Chandos  clause 66 

September  22.  The  Bill  finally  passes  the  Commons  by  345 

to  239,  and  goes  up  to  the  Lords,  who  throw  it  out  on 

second  reading 67 

Excitement  in  the  country 69 

December  6.  Parliament  reassembles 72 

March  23,  Third  Reform  Bill  passes  the  Commons 73 

Position  of  the  Lords.     The  '  Waverers  ' 73 

Lord  Lyndhurst's  motion.     Resignation  of  Lord  Grey. 

The  Duke  of  Wellington  cannot  form  a  Ministry. 

The  King  consents  to  the  creation  of  New  Peers  and 

the  Lords  give  way 75 

June  4.  The  Bill  passes  the  Lords  and  receives  the  King's 

assent  a  few  days  later 76 

1833.  Emancipation  of  the  West  Indian  slaves 83 

Lord  Stanley's  resolutions 86 

The  trade  of  India  thrown  open  to  the  world    ....  93 

Lord  Ashley's  Factory  Act 94 

Poor  Law  Reform 124 

The  Irish  Tithe  War 98 

1834.  Mr.  Ward's  motion  on  the  Irish  Church 104 

Resignations  in  the  Ministry.     Commission  appointed 

to  report  upon  the  Irish  Church no 

Lord  Grey  resigns  and  is  succeeded  by  LordMelboume. 

The  King  dismisses  his  Ministers 117 

Sir  Robert  Peel's  first  Administration 118 

183s,  June  26.  Peel  defeated  on  I^rd  John  Russell's  Resolution 
on  the  Irish  Church.  Lord  Melbourne  returns  to 
office.     Irish  Tithe  Bill,  which  was  finally  passed  by 

Lord  John  Russell  in  1838 119 

Municipal  Corporations  reformed.  Lord  John  Russell's 

Bill  passed  September  7 130 

1837.    Death  of  William  IV.    Accession  of  Queen  Victoria  .    139 

V  1838.    Separation  of  Hanover  from  England 141 

Anti-Corn  Law  League  formed 179 


Contents.  xi 

FA.CB 

1832-37.  Mitigation  of  the  Criminal  Laws 144 

1837.    Electric  Telegraph  invented 161 

1839.  State  grant  in  aid  of  National  Education  increased,  and 

henceforward  managed  by  a  Committee  of  the  Privy 

Council 143 

Alteration  of  the  Convict  Laws 147 

Abolition  of  the  Press  Gang  for  the  Navy 151 

1840.  January  i.  Sir  Rowland  Hill's  Penny  Postage  adopted  .    153 
March  3.  The    Publication  of    Parliamentary  Debates  pro- 
tected against  actions  for  libel 162 

1841.  Lord  Melbourne  resigns.     Sir  Robert  Peel's  second 

Administration 181 

Agitation  for  Repeal  of  the  Com  Laws.  The  Free 
Trade  controversy 181 

1845.  Irish  Education.    Queen's  Colleges.    Opposition  of  Sir 

Robert  Inglis.  Establishment  of  the  Irish  Board  of 
National  Education 167 

Famine  in  Ireland  brings  the  agitation  for  Free  Trade 
to  a  head.  History  of  the  Com  Laws.  Bright, 
Cobden,  Villiers 17S-81 

Dissensions  in  the  Cabinet.  Lord  John  Russell's  letter 
to  the  Electors  of  London 184 

Peel  is  deserted  by  some  of  his  colleagues  and  resigns  ,    186 

Lord  John  Russell  fails  to  form  a  Ministry  and  Peel 
returns  to  office 186 

1846,  January  22.   A  new    Parliament   meets.     Sir   Robert 

Peel  declares  rn  favour  of  Free  Trade.     Protectionist 
party  of  Lord  George  Bentinck  and  Mr.  Disraeli  .    186 
May  15.  Repeal  of  the  Corn  Laws  passes  the  CommonB  .    .    .    187 
June  27.  The  Bill  passes  the  Lords.     Peel's  Ministry  over- 
thrown in  the  Commons  on  the  Irish  Coercion  Bill. 

Lord  John  Russell's  first  Administration 188 

Triumph  of  Free  Trade 189 

1849.    Repeal  of  the  Navigation  I^aws 192 

Agitation  for  further  reform.  Chartism.  The  Six  Points 

of  the  Charter.     Charter  riots  at  Newport 195 

O'Connell's  agitation  for  the  Repeal  of  the  Union   .    .    196 


xii  Contents. 

PACS 

He  is  prosecuted  for  seditious  speaking,  but  his  con- 
demnation is  reversed  by  the  Lords.    The  Young 

Ireland  Confederation 200 

Revolutions  on  the  Continent 200 

1848.    Fall  of  the  Guizot  Ministry  in  France 201 

Dethronement  of  Louis  Philippe 201 

Popular  rising  in  Austria 202 

Republic  proclaimed  in  Venice 20a 

Pius  IX.  in  exile  at  Gaeta.    A   Republic  at   Rome. 

Mazzini 202 

Hungarian  revolts.      Kossuth 203 

March  23.  Defeat  of  Charles  Albert,  King  of  Sardinia,  at  the 

head  of  the  Italians  at  Novara 203 

April  12.     France  restores  the  Pope  to  Rome 203 

In  England  Chartism  ends  and  the  Young  Ireland  party 

is  broken  up 204 

Reform  triumphs  over  Revolution 205 

1850,   July  2.     Death  of  Sir  Robert  Peel 205 

A  Survey,  Political  and  Social 208 


A 


xm 


PRIME  MINISTERS.     1830—1830. 

Duke  of  Wellington Jan.   25,  1828  to  Nov.  22,  1830. 

Earl  Grey Nov.  22,  1830  ''   July    18,  1834. 

Lord  Melbourne July  18,  1834  "  Dec.  26,  1834. 

Sir  Robert  Peel Dec.  26,  1834  "  April  18,  1835. 

Lord  Melbourne April  18,  1835  "  Sept.    6,  1841. 

Sir  Robert  Peel Sept.   6,  1841  "  July     6,  1846. 

Lord  John  Russell Jxily    6,  1846  "  Feb.  24,  1851. 


ADMINISTRA  TIONS.     1830—1830. 

I.  1828.     DUKE  OF  WELLINGTON'S  MINISTRY. 

Prime  Minister Duke  of  Wellington. 

Lord  Chancellor Lord  Lyndhurst. 

Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  .    .  Mr.  H.  Goulburn. 

Home  Secretary Sir  R.  Peel. 

Foreign      "  Lord  Aberdeen. 

Colonial     '*  Sir  George  Murray. 

Secretary  of  War Sir  Henry  Hardinge. 

First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty    .    .  Lord  Melville,  succeeded  by  Sir 

James  Graham. 

a.  1830.     THE  REFORM  MINISTRY, 

Prime  Minister Earl  Grey. 

Lord  Chancellor Lord  Brougham. 

Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  .    .  Lord  Althorp. 
Home  Secretary Lord  Melbourne. 


XIV 

Foreign  Secretary Lord  Palmerston. 

Colonial  Secretary Lord   Goderich,   afterwards  Mr. 

Stanley. 
Secretary  of  War Mr.  C.  N.  W.  Wynn,  not  in  the 

Cabinet. 
First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty  .    .  Sir.  J.  R,  Graham. 

Lord  John  Russell  was  Paymaster  of  the  Forces  but  not  in  the 
Cabinet. 

Mr.  Stanley  and  Sir  James  Graham  resigned  office  in  1834  upon 
the  Irish  Church  question,  and  were  succeeded  by  Mr.  Spring  Rice 
and  Lord  Auckland. 

In  July,  1834,  Earl  Grey  retired  and  Lord  Melbourne  suc- 
ceeded him :  the  rest  of  the  Ministers  remamed  in  office:  Lord 
Duncannon  became  Home  Secretary  in  place  of  Lord  Melbourne. 

4.  1834.     SIR  R.  PEEL'S  FIRST  MINISTRY. 

Prime  Minister Sir  R.  Peel. 

Lord  Chancellor Lord  Lyndhurst. 

Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  .    .  Sir  R.  Peel. 

Home  Secretary Mr.  H.  Goulbum. 

Foreign      "  Duke  of  Wellington. 

Colonial     "  Earl  of  Aberdeen. 

Secretary  of  War Lord  Wharncliffe. 

In  this  Ministry  Mr.  W.  E.  Gladstone  was  Under-Secretary  for 
the  Colonies. 

5.  1834.     LORD  MELBOURNE'S  SECOND  MINISTRY. 

Prime  Minister Lord  Melbourne. 

Lord  Chancellor In  commission,  afterwards  Lord 

Cottenham. 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  .    .  Mr.  Spring  Rice. 

Home  Secretary Lord  John  Russell. 

Foreign      "  Lord  Palmerston. 

Colonial      "  Mr.  Grant. 

Secretary  of  War Lord  Howick. 

First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty  .    .  Lord  Auckland. 


XV 

Later  Lord  J.  Russell  became  Colonial  Secretary,  Mr.  Spring 
Rice  entered  the  Upper  House  as  Lord  Monteagle,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded as  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  by  Mr.  Baring :  lL.ofa 
Howick  was  succeeded  at  the  War  Office  by  Mr.  Macaulay. 

6.  1841.     SIR  R.  PEEL'S  SECOND  MINISTRY. 

Prime  Minister Sir  R.  Peel. 

Lord  Chancellor Lord  Lyndhurst. 

Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  .    .  Mr.  Goulburn. 

Home  Secretary Sir  James  Graham. 

Foreign       "       Lord  Aberdeen. 

Colonial      "       Lord  Stanley. 

Secretary  of  War Sir  Henry  Hardlnge. 

First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty    .    .  Lord  Haddington. 
President  of  the  Board  of 

Trade Earl  Ripon,  afterwai-ds  Mi.  Glatt' 

stone. 
Without  office  but  in  the 

Cabinet Duke  of  Wellington. 

7.  1846.     LORD  J.  RUSSELL'S  FIRST  MINISTRY. 

Prime  Minister Lord  J.  Russell. 

Lord  Chancellor Lord  Cottenham. 

Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  .    .  Mr.  C.  Wood. 

Home  Secretary Sir  G.  Grey. 

Foreign       "       Lord  Palmerston. 

Colonial     "       ILarl  Grey  (Lord  Howick). 

First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty    .    .  Lord  Auckland. 

Paymaster- General Mr.  Macaulay, 

President  of  the    Board  of 
Trade E^arl  of  Clarendon. 


THE  EPOCH  OF  REFORM. 

1830-1850. 


CHAPTER  I 

REFORM   AND   REVOLUTION. 

The  epoch  of  Reform  in  England  is  the  period  of  transi- 
tion during  which  the  representative  system  in  Parlia- 
ment and  the  constitutional  system  in  Monarchy  became 
settled  institutions.  The  representative  principle  in 
Parliamentary  Government  is  that  which  secures  to  the 
people  the  right  of  freely  choosing  an  adequate  number 
of  men  to  speak  for  them  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
The  constitutional  principle  in  Monarchy  is  that  which 
requires  the  sovereign  to  act  on  the  advice  of  his  minis- 
ters, who  are  themselves  responsible  to  Parliament,  and 
not  to  attempt  to  govern  the  country  according  to  his 
own  notions  and  his  own  will.  The  epoch  of  Reform  in 
England  coincides  very  nearly  with  the  epoch  of  revolu- 
tion on  the  Continent  of  Europe.  Where  such  reforms 
as  those  which  took  place  in  England  are  resisted  by  the 
force  of  arbitrary  government,  the  natural  result  is  revo- 
lution. As  the  intelligence  of  a  people  develops,  and 
education  spreads,  there  grows  up  among  them  a  convic- 
tion that  "  the  common  sense  of  all,"  as  Mr.  Tennyson 
describes  it,  is  better  able  to  take  care  of  the  common 
interest  than  the  arbitrary  judgment  of  any  sovereign  or 
B 


2  Reform  and  Revolution.  1830 

statesman,  however  sagacious  and  well-meaning.  A 
time  comes  when  that  conviction  has  taken  full  and  firm 
hold  of  the  great  majority  of  a  people,  and  when  that 
time  comes,  it  is  no  longer  possible  to  prevent  the  accom- 
plishment of  a  change  in  the  political  system.  It  is  not 
possible  to  resist  that  change,  any  more  than  it  is  to  resist 
the  action  of  any  physical  law  governing  the  movements 
of  the  world.  No  matter  how  strong  the  despotic  power 
which  endeavours  to  resist,  the  resistance  is  overcome  in 
the  end.  The  movement  of  civilised  men  is  everywhere 
towards  representative  institutions,  and  where  there  is  a 
monarchy,  towards  the  constitutional  principle  in  the 
monarchy.  The  wisdom  of  statesmen  and  of  rulers  con- 
sists in  seeing  when  the  stages  of  political  development 
have  been  reached  at  which  successive  conditions  of 
arbitrary  rule  have  to  give  way  before  the  popular  move- 
ment. When  statesmen  are  wise  enough  to  see  this  for 
themselves  by  the  light  of  their  own  intelligence,  or  are 
made  to  feel  it  by  the  pressure  brought  to  bear  on  them 
and  are  willing  to  give  way  before  the  pressure,  we  have 
reform.  Where  this  is  not  done  we  have  revolt  or  revo- 
lution. If  revolt,  it  is  probable  that  after  a  severe  strain 
there  follows  a  period  of  reaction.  But  that  reaction  is 
sure  to  be  succeeded  by  another  period  of  revolt,  and  if 
the  resistance  of  the  ruling  power  be  prolonged,  there 
comes  at  last  the  period  of  revolution. 

This  chapter  of  history  begins  with  the  year  1830, 
after  the  repeal  of  the  Test  and  Corporation  Act,  in  1828, 
and  after  the  passing  of  the  great  Act  of  Catholic  Eman- 
cipation in  1829.  Such  measures,  great  as  were  their 
results  and  obvious  as  were  their  justice,  do  not  come 
within  the  sphere  of  that  kind  of  political  reform  which 
is  to  be  studied  in  this  volume.  The  principle  on  which 
the  admission  of  Dissenters  to  civil  and  municipal  office, 


1830  Political  Reform.  3 

and  the  political  emancipation  of  Catholics,  was  founded, 
was  one  of  moral  justice.     No  matter  what  the  system  of 
government  which  prevailed  in  England,  the  justice  of 
religious  equality  in  civil  and  political  affairs  would  have 
been  recognised  in  time.     In  some  of  the  most  despotic 
countries  in  the  world  there  never  was  any  idea  of  main- 
taining such  a  principle  of  religious  exclusion  and  intoler- 
ance as  that   illustrated   by  the   disenfranchiscment  of 
Roman  Catholics,  and  the  Test  and  Corporation  Acts. 
Curiously  enough,  some  of  the  countries  which  even  in 
the  present  day  maintain  the  most  antique  and  anomalous 
systems  of  arbitrary  government,  have  never  had  reli- 
gious exclusiveness  or  religious  tests  as  any  part  of  their 
governing  principle.     Therefore,  it  is  not  right  to  regard 
Catholic  Emancipation,  the  recognition  of  the  civil  rights 
of  Dissenters,  or  the  admission  of  the  Jews  to  the  House 
of  Commons,  as  mere  measures  of  political  reform.     The 
disqualification  was  in  itself  an  obvious  and  gross  outrage 
on  the  common  principle  of  justice  which  must  be  sup- 
posed to  be  the  basis  of  every  state  system.     But  while 
it  is  perfectly  obvious  to  the  modern  mind  that  no  man 
ought  to  be  excluded  from  citizenship  and  its  full  privi- 
leges because  of  his  religious   faith,  it   is   not   by  any 
means    equally   obvious   that   a   certain    proportion   of 
persons  living  in  houses  of  a  certain  rental  should  be 
cither  admitted  to  or  excluded  from  the  right  to  vote. 
When  we  come  to  consider  that  question  we  come  into 
the  region  of  pure  political  reform.     In  the  same  way  the 
functions  of  the  sovereign  cannot  be  defined  on  any 
principle  of  obvious  and  fundamental  justice.     It  must 
be  a  matter  of  growth  and  development,  of  adaptation  to 
the  wants  and  the  condition  of  each  particular  stage  ot 
each  country's  growth  :  a  matter  of  compromise  and  ar- 
rangement. 


4  Reform  and  Revolution.  1830 

Here  then,  alsOj^wc^havc  the  working  of  the  principle 
of  political  rcfonp,     The  two  most  significant  reforms 
accomplished   any!   established  in    England   during  the 
period  which  this  history  describes  are  the  reforms  in 
representation  and  the  changes  gradually  made  in  the 
relation  of  the   sovereign   towards  the   people.     These 
principles  were  formally  established  in  England  between 
the    years    1830    and    1850.     No    matter  what  further 
changes  may  take  place  in  the  governing  system  of  this 
country ;   no  matter  how  the  functions  of  the  sovereign 
may  hereafter  be  either  extended  or  restricted  ;  no  matter 
how   the   principle   of    election    may   be    expanded   or 
varied ;  all  such  changes  can  be  but  further  developments 
of  the  principles  recognised  and  established  between  1830 
and  1850.     All  over  Europe  we  see  the  varying  process 
of  development  of  the  same  principles.     In  every  country 
of  the  European  Continent  the  recognition  of  this  princi- 
ple has  been  preceded  by  a  period  of  revolution  or  of 
revolt,   followed   by   reaction,    and  then   revolt    again. 
Only  in  England  have  the  reforms  been  accomplished 
without  a  struggle.     Nor  is  this  owing,  as  is  generally 
supposed,  to  the  fact  that  the  English  political  system 
embodied  no  serious  grievance  and  no  genuine  oppres- 
sion.    On  the  contrar}',  there  were  many  anomalies  of 
English  political  life  which  bore  down  on  certain  classes 
more  severely  and  more  unjustly  than  such  classes  were 
borne  down  upon  in  almost  any  continental  state.     The 
reason  why  the  changes  in  England  were  so  quiet  and  so 
satisfactory,  was  that  English  statesmen   had  arrived  at 
that  condition  of  political  intelligence  which  made  them 
able  to  recognise  the  fact  that  changes  which  they  them- 
selves disliked,  and  would,  if  they  could,  have  resisted, 
had  nevertheless  become  inevitable,  and  must  take  place 
sooner  or  later,   peacefully  or  with  violence.     English 


1 769-1 82 1  Napoleon.  5 

statesmen  were  fortunately  able  to  see  the  immense  ad- 
vantage of  accepting  the  inevitable  at  the  right  moment. 
Wellington  and  Peel  saw  that  they  could  not  success- 
fully resist  the  changes  which  the  Metternichs  and  the 
Polignacs  believed  they  could  successfully  resist.  To 
this  fact  is  due  the  whole  difference  between  the  manner 
in  which  political  changes  were  wrought  out  in  this  coun- 
try and  on  the  Continent.  Had  English  statesmen  been 
like  those  of  foreign  countries,  we,  too,  should  have  had 
to  describe  the  period  between  1830  and  1850  as  a  pe- 
riod, not  of  reform,  but  of  revolution. 

In  1830  Europe  was  just  beginning  to  rise  from  a  long 
period  of  depression  and  of  political  reaction.  The 
French  Revolution  had  swept  over  the  Continent  as  a 
forest  fire  in  America  flames  from  tree  to  tree.  The 
victories  of  the  great  Napoleon  set  the  flag  of  France 
floating  in  every  continental  capital.  From  the  heights 
of  Boulogne  Napoleon  threatened  England  herself  with 
invasion.  Suddenly,  however,  there  came  a  turn  in  the 
tide.  Napoleon  attempted  impossibilities,  and  thus 
brought  ruin  upon  his  ambition  and  himself.  It  has 
been  well  observed  by  a  French  writer  that  the  great 
difference  between  Napoleon  and  Julius  Caesar  is  that 
Cicsar  knew  what  he  could  not  do  as  well  as  what  he 
could  do,  and  was  therefore  successful  to  the  end ;  Na- 
poleon did  not  know  what  he  could  not  do,  and  there- 
fore failed.  Napoleon  dreamed  of  the  complete  subju- 
gation of  Europe ;  of  himself  as  the  sole  autocrat  of  the 
Continent;  even  of  England  beaten  to  her  knees  and 
brought  under  his  dominion.  He  was  not  a  man  of 
sound  political  education,  and  did  not  thoroughly  under- 
stand any  country  but  his  own.  He  was  under  the 
impression  that  the  murmurs  of  political  discontent  which 
reached  him  from  England  really  sj^owed  that  the  Eng- 


6"  Reform  ami  Revolution.         1 798-1813 

lish  people  would  be  glad  of  a  revolution  effected  in  their 
country  by  means  of  an  invasion  from  France.  He  had 
crushed  Austria,  Prussia,  Spain,  Italy,  Holland,  and  all 
the  continental  states  except  Russia,  and  he  had  defeated 
Russia  in  the  battle-field  and  forced  the  Czar  to  come  to 
terms  dictated  by  himself.  He  had  set  up  his  brothers 
as  kings  in  Spain,  Holland,  and  Westphalia;  he  had 
made  his  brilliant  cavalry  officer  Murat  king  of  Naples, 
and  one  of  his  marshals,  Bernadotte,  king  of  Sweden. 
At  one  point  of  his  career  Napoleon  had  no  acknow- 
ledged enemy  in  Europe  but  England  alone.  Pitt,  the 
Prime  Minister,  son  of  the  great  Chatham,  had  striven 
long  and  hard  to  keep  up  an  alliance  of  the  other  Euro- 
pean powers  against  Napoleon,  but  it  had  utterly  failed; 
and  Pitt  never  recovered  from  the  shock  given  to  him  by 
the  news  of  the  crushing  defeat  inflicted  upon  Austria  in 
the  battle  of  Austerlitz.  England  stood  alone  against 
Napoleon  for  a  long  time.  She  was  always  victorious  on 
the  seas.  The  genius  of  Nelson  and  his  successive  vic- 
tories kept  alive  the  spirit  and  enthusiasm  of  the  English 
people,  even  in  the  hours  of  deepest  depression.  At  last 
Napoleon  went  so  far  as  to  issue  decrees  from  Berlin  and 
from  Milan  in  which  he  prohibited  all  the  European  na- 
tions from  trading  with  England.  He  entertained  the 
preposterous  idea  that  he  could  thus  actually  destroy  the 
whole  trade  of  England,  and  reduce  her  to  something 
like  starvation.  He  quarrelled  anew  with  Russia,  and 
entered  upon  the  desperate  scheme  of  an  invasion  of  that 
country.  Despite  the  fierce  and  patient  resistance  of 
the  Russians  he  forced  his  way  to  Moscow.  The  people 
set  their  city  on  fire  rather  than  endure  its  occupation  by 
the  French.  Napoleon  had  to  begin  a  retreat  amid  the 
terrible  rigours  of  a  Russian  winter.  The  Russians 
harassed  his  retreating  army  at  every  step.     The  retreat 


1 8 1 5  The  Escape  frovi  Elba.  y 

was  only  a  long  series  of  battles.  Between  Russian 
arms  and  the  Russian  climate  Napoleon  lost  six -sevenths 
of  his  army.  He  had  entered  Russia  with  more  than 
600,000  soldiers ;  he  brought  less  than  80,000  back. 

Meanwhile  the  Duke  of  Wellington  had  been  defeat- 
ing some  of  Napoleon's  best  marshals  in  Spain,  and 
rendering  the  French  occupation  of  that  country  an  im- 
possible task.  Austria  and  Prussia  had  been  recovering 
their  courage  and  strength.  The  folly  of  Napoleon's 
idea,  that  he  could  really  extinguish  the  nationality  of  the 
Germans  and  reduce  them  to  the  condition  of  abject 
bondmen  to  the  power  of  France,  soon  began  to  show 
itself.  Germany  rose  against  him,  and  he  received  an 
overwhelming  defeat  at  Leipzig.  An  alliance  was  again 
formed  for  the  purpose  of  crushing  him  ;  England  was 
the  inspiring  influence  of  the  alliance  ;  Russia,  Austria, 
Prussia,  Sweden,  and  other  powers  were  joined  in  it. 
Napoleon  was  defeated  ;  the  allied  powers  entered  Paris ; 
he  was  deposed  and  sent  to  Elba,  an  islet  in  the  Medi- 
terranean. The  allied  powers  left  him  the  title  of 
Emperor  and  gave  him  a  little  army  with  which  to  amuse 
himself.  Lord  John  Russell  visited  Napoleon  in  Elba, 
and  had  some  conversation  with  him.  Napoleon  showed 
how  little  he  understood  of  England  by  telling  Lord  John 
Russell  that  he  had  no  doubt  the  Duke  of  Wellington 
would  make  use  of  the  great  influence  of  his  military 
success  to  have  himself  declared  king  of  England. 

The  sovereigns  of  Europe  called  together  a  congress 
at  Vienna  for  the  purpose  of  restoring  what  they  con- 
sidered to  be  order,  and  reorganising  the  systems  and 
countries  which  had  been  swept  over  by  Napoleon's 
victories.  The  Bourbon  king  Louis  XVIII.  was  set  up 
in  France.  Suddenly,  while  the  congress  was  sitting. 
Napoleon  escaped  from  Elba,  landed  in  France,  and  was 


8  Reform  and  Revolution.  1815 

welcomed  everywhere  by  the  army  and  the  people.  The 
congress  broke  up  ;  King  Louis  XVIII.  fled  in  very 
unkingly  fashion  out  of  the  country ;  Napoleon  was 
Emperor  of  the  French  once  more.  The  allies  prepared 
to  attack  him,  and  pledged  themselves  never  to  rest  until 
they  had  completely  broken  his  power.  The  only  forces 
immediately  available  were  the  English  and  the  Prus- 
sians under  Wellington  and  Blucher  in  Belgium.  Napo- 
leon flung  himself  on  the  Prussians  and  defeated  them. 
One  of  the  best  of  his  splendid  marshals,  Ney,  attacked 
the  English  at  the  same  time,  but  had  to  fall  back  with- 
out success.  The  object  of  the  English  and  the  Prus- 
sians was  to  draw  their  forces  together  ;  Napoleon's  pur- 
pose was  to  crush  the  English  before  the  Prussians  could 
come  up. 

Wellington  took  up  a  fine  position  at  Waterloo,  not 
very  far  from  Brussels,  the  capital  of  Belgium.  He  was 
attacked  by  Napoleon  there  :  he  had  to  bear  the  whole 
brunt  of  the  day  alone,  for  the  Prussians  only  came  up 
late  in  the  evening,  and  his  army  was  not  only  outnum- 
bered by  that  of  Napoleon,  but  had  only  a  comparatively 
small  number  of  English,  Irish,  and  Scotchmen  in  it, 
being  in  great  measure  made  up  of  Belgians,  Hanover- 
ians, and  Hessians.  Wellington's  generalship  and  the 
indomitable  courage  of  his  own  men  triumphed  over 
every  difficulty.  The  finest  of  the  French  cavalry  could 
make  no  impression  on  them.  Marshal  Ney  himself  led 
more  than  one  desperate  charge.  It  is  worth  observing, 
to  show  how  different  the  real  business  of  a  commander 
often  is  from  the  part  which  he  would  be  made  to  play 
on  the  stage  or  in  a  picture,  that  Ney  prepared  for  one 
charge  by  putting  his  sword  into  its  sheath  in  order  that  it 
might  be  out  of  his  way,  and  that  Murat,  the  most  bril- 
liant cavalry  officer  of  his  day,  hardly  ever  went  into  action 


1 814-15  ^^^  Congress  of  Vienna.  9 

with  any  weapon  more  formidable  than  a  riding-whip  in 
his  hand.  At  last  the  Prussians  came  up,  and  the  defeat 
of  the  French  was  complete.  Napoleon  had  to  fly  for 
his  life.  He  reached  Paris  almost  alone.  He  abdicated 
the  throne,  went  on  board  an  English  man-of-war,  the 
Bellerophon,  and  surrendered  himself  prisoner.  He  was 
sent  to  exile  in  St.  Helena,  an  island  in  the  South  Atlan- 
tic. Thackeray,  the  great  novelist,  when  a  child  return- 
ing from  India,  was  taken  at  St.  Helena  to  see  the  fallen 
Emperor  walking  up  and  down  his  little  garden.  Napo- 
leon never  succeeded  in  regaining  his  freedom,  and  he 
died  in  St.  Helena  ;  still,  after  all  that  wild  and  wonder- 
fujxc^eer,  having  scarcely  passed  middle  age. 

Meanwhile  the  Congress  of  Vienna  set  to  work  to  re- 
store the  old  conditions  of  things  in  Europe.  The  conti- 
nental sovereigns  and  statesmen  had  not  the  faintest 
comprehension  of  the  realities  of  the  situation.  They 
did  not  understand  that  Napoleon  had  really  effaced 
feudalism  and  what  was  called  the  divine  right  of  kings. 
The  French  Revolution,  of  which  he  had  been  the  great 
weapon  and  instrument,  had  destroyed  all  in  the  old  sys- 
tems that  really  deserved  destruction  and  had  long  been 
.waiting  for  it.  No  congress,  no  Holy  Alliance,  as  the 
union  of  some  of  the  continental  sovereigns  was  after- 
wards called,  could  restore  what  the  Revolution  had  ac- 
tually removed.  But  the  continental  sovereigns  and 
statesmen  did  not  see  this,  and  were  fully  convinced  that 
it  only  needed  a  little  exertion  of  energy  to  bring  back 
the  old  order  of  things.  The  Holy  Alliance  was  framed 
by  a  convention  signed  with  the  names  of  Francis,  Em- 
peror of  Austria,  Frederick  William,  King  of  Prussia, 
and  Alexander,  Emperor  of  Russia.  The  convention 
declared  that  these  sovereigns  had  no  other  object  in 
framing  the  agreement  than  to  publish  to  the  world  their 


I  o  Reform  and  Revolution.  1814-27 

fixed  resolution  to  take,  in  the  administration  of  their  own 
states  and  in  their  relations  with  other  powers,  the  pre- 
cepts of  religion  for  their  sole  guide.  They  therefore 
pledged  themselves  to  "  remain  united  by  the  bonds  of  a 
true  and  indissoluble  fraternity,"  and  to  help  each  other 
and  to  use  their  arms  to  protect  religion,  peace,  and  jus- 
tice. Finally,  the  document  declared  that  all  powers 
which  should  choose  "  solemnly  to  avow  the  sacred  prin- 
ciples which  have  dictated  the  present  act  will  be  received 
with  equal  ardour  and  affection  into  this  holy  alliance." 
These  last  words  gave  to  the  alliance  the  name  by  which 
it  has  ever  since  been  known.  It  soon  appeared,  how- 
ever, that  by  maintaining  peace,  religion,  and  justice,  the 
allied  powers  only  meant  the  carrying  out  of  their  own 
despotic  will,  and  securing  their  own  supposed  interests. 
They  proclaimed  themselves  the  champions  and  minis- 
ters of  religion  and  justice,  but  reserved  to  themselves  the 
right  of  defining  what  justice  and  religion  were.  Justice 
and  religion  meant,  according  to  their  definition,  the  di- 
vine right  of  kings,  the  sacredness  of  despotic  power, 
and  the  suppression  of  free  speech  and  public  liberty  of 
every  kind,  wherever  they  could  exercise  any  power  of 
intervention. 

So  they  complacently  set  to  work  to  put  back  the  hand 
of  time  to  the  historical  hour  at  which  it  was  pointing 
when  the  mob  of  Paris  destroyed  the  Bastile.  They  re- 
stored the  dethroned  princes  and  princelings  ;  they  sus- 
tained arbitrary  authority  everywhere  ;  they  proclaimed 
once  again  the  principle  of  the  divine  right  of  kings ; 
they  put  a  stop  to  liberty  of  speech  or  publication ; 
they  governed  by  soldiers  and  police.  They  bound 
themselves  by  the  engagement  from  which  was  taken  the 
name  of  "  holy  alliance  "  to  unite  in  putting  down  revo- 
lutionary agitation  wherever  it  should  show  itself.     For  a 


1814-27  The  Policy  of  Canning.  \  i 

time,  England,  under  such  ministers  as  Lord  Liverpool 
and  Lord  Castlereagh,  lent  herself  to  this  policy  of  reac- 
tion and  repression.  It  was  only  when  Canning,  the 
great  parliamentary  orator  and  statesman,  came  to  be 
really  powerful  that  this  country  distinctly  and  finally 
withdrew  from  any  participation  in  the  principles  and  the 
policy  of  the  holy  alliance.  Gradually  the  very  strin- 
gency of  the  reaction  brought  about  the  undoing  of  much 
of  its  own  work.  The  resolve  of  the  Bourbon  Govern- 
ment of  France  to  intervene  in  the  affairs  of  Spain,  in 
order  to  put  down  popular  movements  there,  impelled 
Canning  to  recognise  the  independence  of  the  Spanish 
colonies  in  Mexico  and  South  America  that  were  then  in 
revolt  against  Spanish  dominion,  and  thus,  as  he  said 
himself  in  the  House  of  Commons,  to  call  in  the  New 
World  to  redress  the  balance  of  the  Old.  The  allies  had 
joined  Holland  and  Belgium  under  the  crown  of  an 
Orange  Prince — a  union  impossible  of  realisation  since 
the  days  of  William  the  Silent  himself;  and  the  result 
thus  far  was  but  a  growing  evidence  of  an  incompatibil- 
ity which  could  only  end,  as  it  actually  did  end  soon 
after,  in  convulsion  and  in  the  total  separation  of  the 
countries  thus  forced  together  against  their  inclination. 
The  independence  of  Greece  is  due  to  the  foreign  policy 
of  England.  Greece  had  long  been  suffering  the  most 
cruel  oppression  under  the  rule  of  the  Turk.  A  rebel- 
lion broke  out  among  the  Greeks.  The  English  states- 
men endeavoured  at  first  to  restore  peace  by  securing 
a  genuine  reform  in  the  system  by  which  Greece  was 
governed ;  but  as  it  became  more  and  more  evident  that 
the  Turks  would  not  reform  and  that  Greece  would  not 
submit,  the  sympathy  of  England  was  cordially  given  to 
the  Greeks  in  their  gallant  struggle,  and  at  last  an  alli- 
ance was  formed  by  England,  France,  and  Russia,  in 


12        Englami  after  the  War  with  Napoleon.    1815-30 

which  England  took  the  lead,  and  the  result  was  the 
establishment  of  Greek  independence.  No  English 
statesman  would  accept  the  responsibility  of  the  battle 
of  Navarino,  in  which  the  Turkish  fleet  was  destroyed 
by  the  united  fleets  of  the  allies  under  an  English  Admi- 
ral. But  the  policy  of  England  had  none  the  less 
brought  about  the  freedom  of  Greece.  In  fact,  the  prin- 
ciple on  which  the  Holy  Alliance  had  acted  tended  only 
to  accomplish  the  very  results  which  it  was  formed  to 
prevent.  The  extravagances  of  the  French  Revolution 
and  the  reckless  aggressive  ambition  of  Napoleon  had 
set  in  motion  that  reaction  which  reached  its  height  in 
the  Holy  Alliance.  The  Holy  Alliance  in  its  turn,  by 
trying  to  suppress  every  free  movement,  made  revolution 
unavoidable  on  the  Continent,  and  opened  the  way  for 
reform  in  England. 


CHAPTER  H. 

ENGLAND  AFTER  THE  WAR  WITH  NAPOLEON. 

The  years  between  181 5  and  1830  were  specially  favour- 
able for  the  growth  of  a  spirit  encouraging  a  new  move- 
ment towards  political  reform.  England  was  weary  of 
a  war  which  had  lasted  with  little  intermission  for  more 
than  twenty-one  years.  Her  people  had  had  their  fill  of 
military  glory,  and  had  paid  their  ample  share  of  personal 
and  public  sacrifice.  Domestic  improvement  had  long 
been  neglected.  Ail  schemes  of  political  reform  had 
been  thrown  into  the  shade  for  the  time.  England  and 
her  statesmen  were  filled  with  the  one  paramount  idea — 
that  of  crushing  the  national  enemy.  Even  while  the 
process  of  crushing  the  national  enemy  was  going  on 
there  were  a  good  many  persons  here  and  there  who 


1815-30  England  after  Waterloo.  13 

never  felt  quite  certain  whether  a  different  kind  of  policy 
on  the  part  of  the  English  government  might  not  have 
changed  the  enemy  into  a  friend.  There  were  many 
who  doubted  whether  a  different  course  pursued  towards 
the  French  Republic  might  not  have  avoided  all  the 
hatred  and  all  the  warlike  rivalry  which  imposed  so 
much  sacrifice  on  both  peoples.  At  this  distance  of  time 
we  only  hear  of  the  uprising  of  the  national  spirit  against 
Napoleon  and  the  French,  and  the  hatred  felt  for  "the 
Corsican  ogre,"  and  the  exultation  of  Europe  over  his 
fall.  But  anyone  who  takes  the  trouble  to  look  a  little 
closely  into  the  history  of  that  time  will  find  that  the 
sympathy  which  welcomed  the  birth  of  the  French  Re- 
public outlived  amongst  certain  classes  in  this  country 
the  errors  and  excesses  of  that  Republic,  and  went  with 
Napoleon  long  after  he  had  ceased  to  represent  the 
Republican  principle.  At  all  events,  there  were  many 
who  much  doubted  whether  the  triumphs  which  the  long 
struggle  brought  to  England  were  worth  the  cost  and  the 
suffering  by  which  they  were  bought. 

After  the  war  was  over  and  the  nation  had  settled 
down  to  peace  again,  there  came  naturally  a  certain  time 
of  political  prostration,  owing  in  part  to  the  reaction 
against  the  first  enthusiasm  created  by  the  French  Re- 
public and  the  disappointment  of  so  many  generous 
hopes,  which,  like  those  of  Fox,  were  founded  on  the 
uprising  of  that  great  new  principle  in  Europe.  But  the 
continuance  of  peace  brought  a  revival  of  domestic  pros- 
perity, and  with  it  a  revival  of  the  feelings  which  make 
for  political  reform.  Mr.  Walpole  in  his  "  History  of 
England  "  justly  observes,  in  contrasting  the  England  of 
1830  with  the  England  of  181 5,  that  in  1815  legislation 
had  been  directed  to  secure  the  advantage  of  a  class. 
During  the  interval  between  181 5  and  1830  most  of  the 


1 4        England  after  the  War  with  Napoleon.    1 8 1 5-30 

sinecures  established  for  the  benefit  of  the  higher  classes 
had  been  abohshed.  It  seems  now  almost  incompre- 
hensible that  people  should  have  endured  so  long  the 
existence  of  many  of  those  gross  and  monstrous  sine- 
cures— offices  with  large  pay  and  no  duties — invented  for 
the  purpose  of  pensioning  some  bankrupt  member  of  the 
aristocracy.  The  practice  which  allowed  pulilic  officers 
to  discharge  their  duties  by  deputies  had  also  been  to  a 
great  extent  abolished.  Roman  Catholics  were  allowed 
to  sit  in  Parliament.  Dissenters  might  hold  all  manner 
of  civil  and  political  offices.  A  Jew  might  be  a  civic 
officer  of  London.  In  commercial  legislation  the  princi- 
ple of  reform  was  making  its  appearance  also.  In  foreign 
policy  there  was  a  reaction  going  on  against  the  princi- 
ples of  the  Holy  Alliance  and  "  the  crowned  conspirators 
of  Verona,"  as  Sydney  Smith  called  them,  and  there  was 
a  tendency  to  recognise  that  principle  of  nationalities 
which  has  inspired  so  profoundly  the  foreign  policy  of 
our  own  time.  The  criminal  code  had  been  mitigated 
by  the  abolition  of  some  of  its  most  cruel  excesses.  The 
Chancery  Courts  and  Ecclesiastical  Courts  had  felt  the 
influence  of  the  growing  spirit  of  inquiry  and  of  reforma- 
tion. 

It  would  not  have  been  possible  that  political  reform 
should  remain  long  inactive  under  conditions  so  favour- 
able to  the  development  of  reasonable  principles  in  every 
other  direction.  At  the  same  time  that  all  this  improve- 
ment was  making  itself  manifest,  the  condition  of  the 
labouring  classes  in  the  counties  was  not  growing  better. 
Perhaps  it  would  be  rash  to  say  that  the  labouring  poor 
were  positively  worse  off  in  1830  than  they  had  been  half 
a  century  before,  but  at  least  they  were  relatively  worse 
off.  Their  condition  had  not  improved  in  any  sense, 
while  the  artisans  in  the  towns  were  getting  more  pros- 


i8i7  The  Blanketeers.  15 

perous  and  more  intelligent  and  more  capable  of  acting 
in  combination.  The  manufacturing  power  of  England 
had  grown  immensely.  New  inventions,  new  appliances 
in  almost  every  department  of  industrial  sciemze  were 
giving  fresh  employment  in  every  direction,  /^ven  the 
very  mechanism  which  the  artisans  dreaded  and  detested 
at  first,  under  the  idea  that  it  would  interfere  with  man's 
labour  and  his  wages,  was  obviously  operating  only  to 
increase  the  amount  of  employment  in  all  the  manufac- 
turing centres  of  the  country.  Here  we  have  three  con- 
ditions each  acting  in  its  own  way  as  an  influence  in 
favour  of  political  reform.  War  is  over  and  there  seems  ^ 
no  prospect  of  its  return  ;  artisans  in  towns  are  better  I 
paid  and  more  self-reliant  than  they  were  ;  labourers  in  | 
the  counties  are,  if  not  poorer,  certainly  no  better  off  I 
than  at  any  previous  time.  The  interval  of  peace  gives 
men  leisure  to  think  of  domestic  politics.  The  sinking, 
or  apparently  sinking,  condition  of  the  labouring  classes 
in  the  counties,  where  privilege  is  strongest,  shows  the 
necessity  for  some  step  of  reform  being  undertaken  ;  and 
the  working  classes  in  the  cities  better  paid,  more  inde- 
pendent and  more  capable  of  combination  than  ever  they 
had  been  before,  furnish  a  kind  of  reserve  force  at  the 
command  of  political  reformers. 

Many  causes  had  operated  to  throw  the  artisan 
classes  of  the  northern  and  midland  towns  into  hostility 
against  Tory  principles  and  Governments.  The  memory 
of  the  Blanketeers  was  still  fresh  in  the  public  mind.  In 
1817  some  starving  colliers  of  the  North  had  thought  of 
making  a  pilgrimage  to  the  house  of  the  Prince  Regent  in 
London,  in  the  hope  of  being  allowed  to  tell  their  tale  of 
misery  to  him,  and  induce  him  to  do  something  on  their 
behalf.  Following  the  example  of  those  poor  fellows,  a 
large  body  of  Manchester  working  men  resolved  that 


1 6        England  after  the  War  with  Napoleon.   1 817-19 

they  would  walk  to  London,  make  known  their  griev- 
ances to  the  authorities  there,  and  ask  for  parliamentary 
reform  as  one  means  of  improving  their  condition.  The 
plan  was  that  each  pilgrim  was  to  carry  a  blanket  with 
him,  so  that  they  might  rest  by  the  way  at  any  chance 
place  of  shelter.  For  this  they  were  called  Blanketeers, 
The  Government  regarded  this  harmless  movement  in 
exactly  the  same  light  as  the  Government  of  Louis  the 
Sixteenth's  earliest  years  had  regarded  the  attempt  of  a 
starving  crowd  to  excite  the  compassion  of  the  sovereign  : 
"And  so,  on  May  2,  1775,  these  vast  multitudes  do  here 
at  Versailles  chdtcau,  in  widespread  wretchedness,  in 
sallow  faces,  squalor,  winged  raggedness,  present,  as  in 
legible  hieroglyphic  writing,  their  Petition  of  Grievances. 
The  chateau  gates  must  be  shut ;  but  the  king  will  ap- 
pear on  the  balcony  and  speak  to  them.  They  have 
seen  the  king's  face ;  their  Petition  of  Grievances  has 
been,  if  not  read,  looked  at.  For  answer  two  of  them  are 
hanged  on  a  '  new  gallows  forty  feet  high,'  and  the  rest 
driven  back  to  their  dens  for  a  time."  No  leader  of 
the  Blanketeers  was  hanged,  but  some  of  them  were 
seized  and  imprisoned.  Troops  were  placed  along  the 
line  of  march  ;  many  of  the  pilgrims  were  sent  back  to 
their  dens  again ;  others  were  thrown  into  prison  forth- 
with. 

It  is  needless  to  say  that  these  high-handed  measures 
did  not  prevail  on  people  to  be  content  with  their  condi- 
tion, to  refrain  from  holding  meetings,  and  renounce  thci?' 
demand  for  political  reform.  A  very  widespread  and 
vehement  agitation  sprang  up.  Manchester  took  a  lead- 
ing part  in  it.  Most  of  the  towns  in  the  North  fermented 
with  it.  Orator  Hunt,  as  he  was  called,  a  Radical 
agitator  and  stump  speaker,  became  famous  for  a  moment 
as  a  hopeful   leader.      He    found  his  level   afterwards 


1 8 19  Peterloo.  17 

in  the  House  of  Commons,  and  the  recognition  of 
the  principle  of  reform  would  in  any  case  probably  have 
extinguished  him,  for  he  was  not  in  any  sense  a  genuine 
orator  or  even  a  great  demagogue.  But  the  Government 
set  about  to  deal  with  the  agitation  in  a  fashion  which 
made  agitation  popular  and  widespread,  and  the  same 
sort  of  policy  made  Orator  Hunt  into  a  popular  idol, 
and  brought  the  condition  of  England,  to  adopt  Mr. 
Gladstone's  famous  phrase,  "  within  a  measurable  distance 
of  civil  war.  "  On  August  16,  1819,  a  great  meeting  was 
held  in  the  large  field  near  St.  Peter's  Church,  Man- 
chester, the  spot  on  which  the  Free  Trade  Hall  now  stands. 
About  80,000  persons  seem  to  have  been  present,  and 
Orator  Hunt  was  to  be  the  hero  of  the  day.  Special  Con- 
stables and  Yeomanry  were  present  in  large  numbers. 
When  Hunt  began  to  speak  some  movement  took  place 
amongst  the  Yeomanry  which  the  crowd  interpreted  as 
an  attempt  to  disperse  them.  The  Yeomanry  seem  them- 
selves to  have  been  alarmed  by  the  swaying  motions  of 
the  crowd.  The  result  was  an  unlucky  demonstration  of 
authority  on  the  one  side,  and  a  counter  demonstra- 
tion of  force  on  the  other.  The  Riot  Act  was  read.  Hunt 
was  arrested  the  moment  he  began  to  speak.  He  gave 
himself  up  quietly,  recommended  peace  and  order  to  the 
crowd,  and  was  taken  to  the  prison — for  no  offence  that 
anyone  could  see.  A  scene  of  confusion  took  place 
which  has  never  been  clearly  explained,  but  at  last  the 
Yeomanry  rode  at  the  crowd  flourishing  their  swords. 
The  immense  size  and  weight  of  the  crowd  rendered  its 
dispersion  impossible,  and  the  result  was  that  many  poor 
people  were  trampled  under  the  feet  of  the  horses  or 
sabred  by  the  swords  of  the  Yeomanry.  Some  of  the 
crowd  flung  stones  at  the  horsemen.  Altogether  between 
three  and  four  hundred  persons  were  more  or  less  injured. 

c 


1 8        England  after  the  War  with  Napoleon.    1817-29 

Ever>'  attempt  to  have  the  action  of  the  Yeomanry  pun- 
ished or  even  rebuked  proved  hopeless.  The  event  was 
long  afterwards  remembered  as  the  massacre  of  Peterloo. 
Its  immediate  effect  was  to  swell  up  the  fire  of  anger  on 
both  sides  into  something  that  seemed  to  threaten  a  dan- 
gerous explosion. 

The  Government  had  no  idea  of  dealing  with  the  crisis 
in  any  other  way  than  by  bringing  in  new  measures 
authorising  them  to  search  for  arms  and  seize  them,  to 
disperse  great  popular  meetings,  to  punish  seditious  pub- 
lications, and  to  apply  the  principle  of  coercion  every- 
where. Any  coercion  Bill  was  sure  to  be  carried  by  a 
large  majority  of  the  House  of  Commons,  but  any  propo- 
sal to  inquire  into  the  causes  of  the  existing  discontents 
and  distress  had  little  chance  of  obtaining  even  a  decent 
number  of  supporters. 

The  one  great  reform  which,  articulately  or  inarticulate- 
ly, the  public  voice  began  now  to  demand,  was  a  measure 
which  should  make  the  House  of  Commons  a  represen- 
tative institution.  This  was  a  change  to  be  accomplished 
by  law.  There  was,  however,  another  reform  necessary 
to  be  effected  in  order  to  make  the  English  Government 
constitutional  in  the  true  sense.  This  latter  reform  did 
not  require  legislative  action  to  give  it  effect,  and,  indeed, 
could  liardly  be  brought  about  by  any  Act  of  Parliament. 
It  was  a  change  in  the  relations  of  the  Sovereign  to  the 
Ministry  and  to  the  House  of  Commons,  a  change  which 
should  make  the  majority  of  the  House  of  Commons 
practically  supreme  over  the  Sovereign  as  well  as  over 
the  Ministry.  The  one  reform,  as  we  shall  presently  see, 
brought  about  the  other. 

The  representation  of  the  people  of  these  countries  was 
in  an  anomalous  condition.  The  House  of  Commons 
^id  not,  in  any  sense,   fairly  represent  the  nation.     The 


1817-29         The  Representative  Principle.  ig 

theory  of  a  representative  constitution  is  very  simple.  It 
is  founded  on  what  may  be  called  an  ordinary  principle 
of  business.  There  is  no  mystery  about  it,  and  no  pro- 
found philosophy.  It  is  simply  the  principle  that  every 
man  understands  best  his  own  business,  and  that  for  a 
Government  to  get  to  understand  the  best  way  to  manage 
the  affairs  of  a  country  the  surest  method  is  to  get  as 
nearly  as  possible  the  opinion  of  every  man  in  the  coun- 
try. Out  of  all  these  opinions  a  reasonable  Government 
is  supposed  to  be  able  to  form  a  general  idea  of  what  the 
wishes  of  the  country  are,  and  it  is  fairly  to  be  supposed 
that  the  common  wish  of  the  country  will  in  ordi- 
nary cases  tend  in  the  direction  of  the  country's 
welfare.  Now,  as  it  is  not  possible  that  each  man  shall 
give  his  opinion  and  have  his  say  in  public  affairs,  the 
principle  of  representation  forces  itself  into  recognition. 
Certain  spokesmen  are  chosen  by  the  people,  or  at  least 
by  those  of  the  people  who  are  electors  and  have  the 
votes,  and  the  spokesmen  represent  the  views  of  those 
who  have  chosen  them.  Thus  in  a  constitutional  assembly 
the  Government  will  always  have  the  advantage  of  hear- 
ing the  opinions  of  the  majority  in  each  constituency  and 
also  of  the  minority  throughout  the  whole  country.  In 
truth  this  principle  of  representation  really  belongs  in 
more  or  less  crude  form  to  every  system  of  government. 
There  used  to  be  at  one  time  a  great  deal  of  speculation 
as  to  the  relative  advantages  of  a  representative  system 
and  of  what  was  called  a  benevolent  despotism.  But,  in 
fact,  the  comparison  is  one  that  cannot  be  fairly  made. 
There  is  no  absolute  despotism  in  countries  which  have 
emerged  even  from  the  rudest  forms  of  barbarism.  No  one 
man  really  exercises  an  unlimited  and  unconditional  sway 
over  a  people,  and  manages  their  affairs  "  out  of  his  own 
head,"  or  according  to  his  own  caprice.     In  every  state, 


20         England  after  the  War  with  Napoleon.      1829 

however  despotic  its  constitution  may  seem  to  be,  the 
Sovereign  has  to  take  into  account  the  feelings  and 
opinions  of  those  over  whom  he  rules.  Whether  he  does 
this  perfectly  or  imperfectly,  whether  by  means  of  a 
recognised  representative  system  or  by  means  of  inqui- 
ries and  investigation  made  through  his  agents  and  his 
creatures,  the  principle  is  the  same.  He  has  to  consult 
and  docs  consult  what  he  believes  to  be  the  general  wish 
of  his  people.  The  Sultan  Haroun  Alraschid  goes  forth 
at  night  in  disguise  and  wanders  through  the  streets  of 
Bagdad  to  find  out  what  the  people  are  saying.  Louis  the 
Great  endeavours  to  get  at  what  people  are  saying 
through  the  medium  of  police  spies  and  court  gossip. 
Napoleon  I.  sets  himself  to  work  to  manufacture  a  public 
opinion  which  may  supply  the  place  of  the  genuine  article, 
and  may  support  him  in  every  enterprise  which  he  feels 
inclined  to  undertake.  The  Emperor  Nicholas  of  Russia 
condescends  to  confer  with  his  council  of  notables,  and 
endeavours  to  get  at  the  opinions  of  the  various  govern- 
ments and  provinces  of  his  Empire.  No  ruler,  however 
autocratic,  ventures  to  govern  in  absolute  independence 
of  the  opinions  of  his  subjects.  He  gets  some  hint  at 
public  opinion  through  police  reports,  through  epigrams ; 
or  at  last  through  infernal  machines,  Orsini  bombs, 
daggers,  dynamite.  What  men  think  will  be  made 
known. 

Where  a  constitutional  principle  is  recognised,  and 
where  the  system  of  open  representation  is  admitted,  it 
is  obviously  of  the  utmost  importance  that  the  system 
shall  be  genuine,  and  shall  answer  the  purposes  it  pro- 
fesses to  attain.  The  benevolent  despot,  making  his  in- 
quiries after  his  own  fashion,  would  be  much  more  likely 
to  get  a  just  notion  of  what  his  people  wanted  than  the  so- 
called  constitutional  Sovereign  who  relied  upon  an  inade- 


1829  Catholic  Emancipation.  2X 

quate  and  imperfect  system   of  representation.    There 
never  was  a  time  in  England  when  the  authority  of  the 
Sovereign  was  held  to  be  absolute  over  the  people,  and 
when  the  King,  in  his  dealings  with  any  class  or  person 
of  the  community,  was  supposed  to  have  the  same  kind 
of  power  which  some  of  the  peasantry  of  Russia  are  still 
willing  to  believe  is  possessed  by  their  Czar.     For  gene-  1/ 
rations  in  England  the  only  absolute  authority  claimed 
for  or  by  the    Sovereign,   was    an    authority   over  his 
Ministers ;  these  were,  in  fact,  considered  his  Ministers 
in  the  strictest  sense,  his  subordinates,  his  clerks,  the 
officers  of  his  authority,  the  instruments  of  his  will.    Down 
almost  to  1830,  it  was  still  the  habit  of  the  Sovereign  to 
govern  the  country,  when  he  chose,  with  a  set  of  Minis- 
ters who  were  continually  outvoted  and  censured  in  the 
House  of  Commons.     The  king,  up  to  the  same  period, 
did  really  exercise  the  right  which  now  exists  only  as  a 
name,  that  of  appointing  and  dismissing  Ministers  to  suit 
his  own  will  and  pleasure.     The  great  change  which  in 
our  time  has  been  brought  about  makes  it  certain  that 
although  there  be  no  written  law  or  constitutional  pre- 
cept to  enforce  it,  the  Sovereign   no  longer  chooses  or 
dismisses   Ministers,  except  with   reference  to   the   ex- 
pressed will   of   the   nation   through   its  representative 
chamber.     It  is  impossible  in  our  time  to  suppose  that  a 
Sovereign  could  attempt  to  return  to  the  principles  so 
completely,  although  so  silently,  abolished.     A  country  is 
a  constitutional  country  only  when  this  change  has  been 
accomplished.     The  transition  which  was  made  by  Eng- 
land in  the  period  between  the  reign  of  George  III.  and 
the  first  few  years  of  the  reign  of  (2ueen  Victoria,  was,  in 
this  respect,  as  important  a  reform  as  any  which  could 
be  effected  in  our  Parliamentary  institutions. 

Although  this  little  history  does  not  deal  with  the  story 


22         England  after  the  War  with  Napoleon.      1829 

of  Catholic  emancipation,  it  is  of  material  bearing  on  our 
task  to  point  out  the  result  of  the  manner  in  which 
Catholic  emancipation  was  granted.  The  world  has 
justly  praised  the  wisdom  of  English  statesmen  like 
Wellington  and  Peel,  who  would  have  refused  Catholic 
emancipation  if  they  could,  but  yet  saw  that  the  time  had 
come  when  they  could  no  longer  safely  refuse  it.  Un- 
doubtedly, by  the  adoption  of  such  a  political  principle 
English  statesmen  have  more  than  once  avoided  revolu- 
tion. But  while  avoiding  a  greater  they  established  a 
lesser  evil.  They  did  not  surround  their  policy  with  the 
dignity  and  the  glory  of  justice.  They  did  not  impress 
the  popular  imagination  and  stimulate  the  popular  rever- 
ence by  the  spectacle  of  a  statesmanship  that  acted  only 
on  the  principle  of  right.  Men  saw  that  their  rulers  did 
the  just  act,  not  because  they  themselves  believed  it  to 
be  just,  but  because  they  found  it  to  be  expedient.  Men 
saw  that  whatever  was  demanded  with  force  enough  at 
its  back  was  likely  to  be  regarded  as  a  demand  which  it 
would  be  expedient  to  grant.  Catholic  emancipation  was 
yielded  not  as  a  matter  of  justice,  but  in  deference  to  a 
pressure  from  without  which  the  Duke  of  Wellington 
declared  that  he  could  not  resist.  He  said  he  had  to 
choose  between  emancipating  the  Catholics  and  en- 
countering a  civil  war,  and  he  was  not  prepared  to  en- 
counter a  civil  war.  Even  when  emancipation  was 
granted,  and  on  these  conditions,  it  was  granted  grudg- 
ingly. Every  possible  attempt  was  made  to  minimise 
its  immediate  influence.  The  man  whose  eloquence  and 
energy  had  done  more  than  any  other  influence  to  force 
emancipation  on  the  Government,  Mr.  O'Connell,  was 
kept  out  of  Parliament  as  long  as  it  was  possible  by  any 
craft  on  the  part  of  the  Government  to  continue  his 
exclusion.     The  effect  of  all  this  was  to  impress  on  the 


1829  Popular  Agitation.  23 

English  as  v/ell  as  the  Irish  people  the  conviction  that 
no  justice  could  be  had  without  a  threat  of  violence,  and 
that  anything  could  be  obtained  which  was  supported  by 
sufficient  demonstration  of  strength.  It  is  hardly  too 
much  to  say  that  to  the  manner  in  which  the  Govern- 
ment resisted  Catholic  emancipation,  and  their  grudging 
way  of  at  last  conceding  it,  is  due  a  great  part  of  the 
discontent  and  disaffection  which  have  existed  in  Ireland 
from  that  time.  It  is  clearly  one  of  the  defects  of  our 
constitutional  system,  that  a  reform  of  any  kind  is  seldom 
made  in  mere  obedience  to  the  justice  of  the  demand. 
Perhaps  this  is  a  defect  inseparable  from  a  popular 
system,  and  to  be  accepted  merely  as  one  of  the  disad- 
vantages attending  every  organisation  worked  out  by 
men.  The  defect  at  all  events  is  there,  and  its  operation 
may  be  observed  in  every  chapter  of  our  political  history. 
No  matter  how  just  may  be  the  claims  of  a  certain  re- 
form, no  politician  expects  to  see  it  granted  spontaneously 
and  because  of  its  justice.  There  must  be  agitation, 
there  must  be  popular  clamour,  there  must  very  often  be 
something  like  a  hint  of  possible  resistance  to  the  law 
before  the  reform  is  carried. 

Indeed,  under  our  present  system  it  is  not  easy  to  see 
how  the  condition  of  things  could  well  be  different.  The 
House  of  Commons  undertakes  to  manage  the  business 
of  the  country.  Every  improvement  of  every  institution 
must  be  accomplished  through  its  means.  Each  year 
brings  fresh  demands  for  reform,  and  new  development 
in  almost  every  direction.  Anomalies  which  our  fore- 
fathers put  up  with  good-humouredly  and  perhaps  did 
not  even  observe,  are  irritating  and  intolerable  to  us. 
With  the  growth  of  education  we  become  continually 
more  and  more  anxious  to  bring  the  practical  working  of 
our  systems  into  harmony  with  reasonable  theories.     All 


24         England  after  the  War  with  Napoleon.      1829 

our  commercial  and  industrial  systems  require,  in  their 
gradual  development,  new  changes  of  legislation  to  suit 
the  altered  conditions.  Thus  we  find  a  multitude  of 
voices  crying  out  together  for  a  change  in  some  law.  It 
is  impossible  that  Parliament  can  undertake  all  the 
changes  together,  and  it  has  therefore  come  to  be  under- 
stood that  the  reform  which  has  the  most  and  the  loudest 
voices  clamouring  on  its  side  must  have  precedence.  It 
is  a  question  not  of  the  survival  of  the  fittest  but  of  the 
precedence  of  the  fittest.  Therefore,  the  course  of  legis- 
lation in  our  times  is  almost  certain  to  go  through  suc- 
cessive stages  each  one  of  which  can  be  foreseen  and 
speculated  on  by  prudent  persons  in  anticipation.  The 
reform  is  first  discussed  and  justified  by  writers  and 
thinkers.  At  this  stage  of  its  history  Parliament  cares 
nothing  about  it.  Then  it  becomes  a  subject  of  agitation 
out  of  doors.  When  it  has  made  stir  enough  in  that 
way  it  becomes  a  question  of  Parliamentary  debate. 
Parliament  however  for  a  long  time  takes  no  further 
account  of  the  proposed  reform  than  to  have  a  discussion 
on  it  every  session.  Suddenly,  however,  by  chance  or 
otherwise,  it  grows  strong  with  the  country.  Great 
meetings  are  held ;  stormy  crowds  come  together ;  per- 
haps there  are  riots ;  at  all  events  there  is  danger  of 
public  disturbance,  and  then  at  length  Parliament  sud- 
denly finds  that  it  has  to  deal  with  a  more  vehement 
claimant  than  any  other  just  then  demanding  to  be  heard, 
and  yields  to  popular  clamour  what  it  never  would  have 
thought  of  yielding  to  justice.  As  Comte  described  all 
the  intelligence  of  man  as  passing  through  its  three 
distinct  gradations  of  the  supernatural,  the  metaphysical, 
and  the  positive,  so  we  may  describe  English  reform  as 
passing  distinctly  through  the  three  stages  of  the  study, 
the  platform,  and  the  Parliament. 


i8y>  Popular  Agitation.  25 

It  is  worth  noting,  too,  that  the  manner  in  which  the 
representative  constitution  of  the  House  of  Commons  has 
been  expanded  has  not  thus  far  tended  in  any  degree  to 
make  it  more  ready  to  take  the  initiative  in  legislation. 
Still,  as  before,  it  waits'  patiently  until  the  voice  of  the 
country  calls  on  it  to  act  and  tells  it  distinctly  what  it  is 
to  do,  before  venturing  on  any  action.  In  no  matter  of 
any  importance  whatever,  does  Parliament  attempt  to 
take  the  initiative,  or  to  anticipate  the  wants  and  wishes 
of  the  country.  In  the  days  just  before  the  passing  of  the 
Reform  Bill,  the  epoch  with  which  we  are  now  imme- 
diately concerned,  it  seemed  to  be  the  principal  office  of 
Parliament  to  resist  as  long  as  possible  every  public  and 
popular  demand.  Statesmanship  then  appeared  to  have 
accepted,  in  domestic  policy  at  least,  the  simple  business 
of  obstruction.  To  resist  change  so  long  as  it  could  safely 
be  resisted,  was  then  apparently  an  English  Minister's 
notion  of  his  duty.  Well  was  it  for  England  that  this 
was  all  that  her  statesmanship  felt  itself  called  upon  to 
do.  Statesmen  in  other  countries  believed  themselves 
conscientiously  bound  to  resist  change  even  at  the  peril 
of  national  peace,  to  resist  it  to  the  death. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  LEADERS   OF    REFORM. 

For  a  long  time  previous  to  1830,  there  seemed  to  be  no 
fixed  rule  in  these  countries  for  the  selection  of  the  towns 
to  have  representatives  in  the  House  of  Commons.  The 
principle  in  former  times  appears  to  have  been  that  the 
Sovereign  issued  his  writ  to  any  town  or  place  he  chose 
to  select.  The  King  invited  such  a  place  to  send  a  re- 
presentative to  advise  him.     The  assumption  was  that  he 


26  The  Leaders  of  Reform.  1830 

chose  the  places  to  be  represented  in  accordance  with 
their  population  and  their  importance,  but  it  is  almost 
needless  to  say  that  the  power  which  the  Sovereign 
assumed  was  exercised  very  often  in  the  most  arbitrary 
fashion.  Habit  came  in  many  cases  to  make  the  arbitrary 
choice  permanent  and  perpetual.  Many  places  which 
had  been  tolerably  populous  when  the  Sovereign  first 
invited  them  to  send  representatives  to  the  House  of 
Commons,  lost  their  population  and  their  importance  and 
fell  into  actual  decay.  Yet  the  Sovereign  continued  to 
issue  his  writ  and  to  invite  those  places  to  send  represen- 
tatives to  Parliament.  In  some  instances  the  places 
named  actually  ceased  to  be  anything  more  than  geo- 
graphical expressions.  The  hamlet  or  village,  or  what- 
ever it  might  have  been,  fell  into  ruin.  There  was  no 
population.  The  owner  of  the  soil  was  perhaps  the  sole 
resident. 

The  case  of  Old  Sarum  is  famous.  Old  Sarum  was  a 
town  in  Wiltshire.  It  stood  not  far  from  where  Salisbury 
now  stands  ;  Salisbury  is  in  fact  New  Sarum.  It  returned 
members  to  Parliament  in  Edward  I.'s  time  and  after- 
wards in  the  days  of  Edward  III.,  and  from  that 
period  down  to  the  time  of  the  Reform  Bill,  which  we  are 
now  about  to  consider.  But  the  town  of  Old  Sarum 
gradually  disappeared.  Owing  to  the  rise  of  "  New 
Sarum,"'  Salisbury,  and  to  other  causes,  the  population 
gradually  deserted  Old  Sarum.  The  town  became  prac- 
tically effaced  from  existence  ;  its  remains  far  less  palpa- 
ble and  visible  than  those  of  any  Baalbec  or  Palmyra. 
Yet  it  continued  to  be  represented  in  Parliament.  It  was 
at  one  time  bought  by  Chatham's  grandfather,  "  Govern- 
or Pitt,"  as  he  was  called  after  he  had  been  Governor  of 
Madras,  the  owner  of  the  famous  diamond.  It  was  cool- 
ly observed   at  the  time  that "  Mr.  Pitt's  posterity    now 


1830  Bribery.  27 

have  an  hereditary  right  to  a  seat  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons as  owners  of  Old  Sarum,  as  the  Earls  of  Arundel 
have  to  a  seat  in  the  House  of  Peers  as  Lords  of  Arundel 
Castle."  Ludgershall  in  Wiltshire  was  another  place 
which  continued  to  send  members  to  Parhament  long 
after  it  had  ceased  to  be  a  constituency.  This  was  the 
place  which  was  offered  up  as  a  free  sacrifice  by  its  rep- 
resentati\  c  during  the  debates  on  the  Reform  Bill.  Grave- 
ly announcing  himself  as  the  patron  of  Ludgershall,  the 
constituency  of  Ludgershall,  and  the  member  for  Lud- 
gershall, this  gentleman  declared  that  in  all  three  capa- 
cities he  meant  to  vote  for  the  disfranchisement  of  Lud- 
gershall. A  place  called  Gatton,  with  seven  electors, 
had  two  members.  Two-thirds  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons was  made  up  of  the  nominees  of  peers  or  great 
landlords.  The  patrons  owned  their  boroughs  and  their 
members  just  as  they  owned  their  parks  and  their  cattle. 
One  duke  returned  eleven  members ;  another,  nine. 
Seats  were  openly  bought  and  sold.  In  some  instances 
they  were  publicly  advertised  for  sale.  The  poll  might 
remain  open  at  one  period  for  six  weeks.  In  1784  its 
limit  was  reduced  to  fifteen  days.  Bribery,  drunkenness, 
hideous  scenes  of  debauchery  and  riot  went  on  without 
intermission  during  all  that  time.  A  county  or  borough, 
during  a  contest,  was  as  completely  surrendered  to  a 
saturnalia  of  infamy,  as  a  captured  town  used  at  one 
time  to  be  given  up  for  a  certain  number  of  days  to 
the  license  of  the  conqueror's  soldiery.  Allowing  for 
the  exaggeration  permissible  to  a  great  humourist,  it  does 
not  seem  as  if  Hogarth's  famous  picture  of  the  election 
gave  any  very  extravagant  notion  of  the  things  that 
were  done  and  the  sights  that  were  seen  during  a  parlia- 
mentary contest  in  England.  Public  opinion  had  hardly 
any  influence  on   the  choice  of  many,  if  not  most  of  the 


2  8  The  Leaders  of  Reform.  1830 

constituencies,  even  when  there  were  constituencies  to 
choose.  Territorial  influences  and  money  settled  the 
matter  between  them.  While  places  no  longer  marked  on 
the  map  had  any  representatives,  the  great  manufactur- 
ing towns,  such  as  Manchester,  Leeds  and  Birmingham, 
were  without  representations.  They  had  grown  up  to  be 
prosperous  and  populous  communities  while  Gatton  and 
Old  Sarum  were  sinking  into  decay  and  death,  but 
the  Sovereign's  power  to  summon  representatives  did 
not  deign  to  take  account  of  them.  In  Ireland  and  Scot- 
land the  condition  of  things  was  on  the  whole  still  worse 
and  more  anomalous,  if  that  were  possible,  than  in  Eng- 
land. 

The  franchise,  both  in  counties  and  in  boroughs,  was 
so  high  as  to  preclude  anything  like  the  possibility  of 
popular  representation.  On  the  other  hand,  this  high 
level  of  franchise  was  balanced  in  the  boroughs  and  cities 
by  a  number  of  arbitrary  franchises,  conferred  on  what 
were  called  freemen,  resident  and  non-resident :  on  forty- 
shilling  freeholders,  and  on  various  associations  or  cor- 
porations of  men ;  and  these,  connecting  no  moral  or 
political  responsibility  whatever  with  the  exercise  of  the 
vote,  really  tended  only  to  give  better  facilities  for  cor- 
ruption. Some  of  these  antiquated  and  anomalous  fran- 
chises only  introduced  into  the  constituency  a  class  of 
persons  who  were  completely  at  the  service  of  the  highest 
bidder.  They  sold  their  votes  as  the  informers  in  certain 
days  of  the  Roman  Empire  sold  their  testimony. 

Meanwhile,  great  English  populations  were  growing 
into  importance  in  the  manufacturing  districts.  Towns 
and  cities  began  to  arise  here  and  there  whose  vastness, 
wealth,  and  intelligence  surpassed  anything  that  could 
have  been  represented  by  local  communities  in  earlier 
days  of  the  Parliament.     Towns  like  Birmingham  and 


/793  ^^''-  Grcf  s  Petition.  29 

Leeds  and  Manchester  and  Sheffield  began  to  have  a 
public  opinion  of  their  own,  interests  of  their  own,  am- 
bitions and  aspirations  of  th^ir  own.  Very  naturally 
they  began  to  crave  for  soms  place  in  the  representative 
system  of  the  country.  Reform  schemes  were  brought 
forward  every  now  and  then,  and  came  to  nothing. 
Lord  Chatham,  in  1770,  supported  a  motion  made  by  the 
Marquis  of  Rockingham,  in  favour  of  Parliamentary  re- 
form, and  pointed  out  that  "  the  strength  and  vigour  of  the 
constitution  "  must  reside,  not  "  in  the  little  dependent  bor- 
oughs," but  in  "the  great  cities  and  counties."  The 
American  War  interposed  and  diverted  attention  from 
the  whole  subject.  In  1782  his  son,  WiUiam  Pitt,  moved 
for  a  Select  Committee  on  the  subject  of  Parliamentary 
reform.  In  1785,  when  Pitt  was  Prime  Minister,  he  made 
an  attempt  to  amend  the  representation  by  taking  from 
thirty-six  small  boroughs  their  right  to  return  members, 
and  endowing  certain  counties  or  populous  places  with 
the  privilege.  His  scheme  also  included  a  provision  for 
gradually  extinguishing  the  franchise  of  boroughs  which 
might  have  fallen  into  decay.  This  scheme,  however, 
was  negatived  by  a  majority  of  74.  It  is  not  likely  that 
Pitt  was  much  in  earnest  about  the  matter;  he  would 
have  had  a  much  larger  following  if  it  had  been  gen- 
erally understood  that  he  really  meant  reform.  Then  the 
French  Revolution  intervened.  That  revolution,  how- 
ever, in  the  first  instance,  did  more  to  excite  the  enthu- 
siasm of  reformers  than  to  arouse  the  alarms  of  those 
who  were  opposed  to  reform.  Mr.  Charles  Grey,  the 
friend  and  pupil  of  Fox,  afterwards  Earl  Grey,  whose 
stately  eloquence  still  survives  in  the  memory  of  living 
men,  took  up  the  cause  of  reform,  and  presented  a  peti- 
tion from  Sheffield,  from  Birmingham,  from  the  city  of 
Edinburgh,  and  various  other  places,  praying  for  Parlia- 


30  The  Leaders  of  Reform.        1793-1830 

mentar}'  reform.  The  most  important,  however,  of  the 
petitions  which  Mr.  Grey  presented,  was  the  famous 
Prayer  from  "the  members  of  the  Society  of  the  Friends 
of  the  People,  associated  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  a 
Parhamentary  reform."  This  remarkable  petition,  pre- 
sented to  the  House  of  Commons  on  May  6,  1793,  de- 
clared that  no  less  than  150  members  were  actually  nom- 
inated by  members  of  the  House  of  Lords ;  that  40  Peers 
returned  81  members  by  their  own  positive  authority  in 
small  boroughs,  and  that  an  absolute  majority  of  the  Re- 
presentative Chamber  wore  returned  by  influences  entirely 
independent  of,  and  opposed  to  the  representative  prin- 
ciple. The  petition  also  complained  of  the  length  and 
the  cost  of  electoral  contests,  and  of  the  complicated 
"fancy  franchises "  which  we  have  already  mentioned. 

The  House  of  Commons,  whose  constitution  was  chal- 
lenged by  this  petition,  decided  by  an  overwhelming  ma- 
jority in  its  own  favour.  Then  the  wild  days  of  the 
French  Revolution  interposed,  and  a  reaction  led  by 
Burke's  famous  Essay  set  in  amongst  all  the  influential 
classes  of  English  society. 

Reform,  the  safeguard  against  revolution,  became 
identified  with  revolution  itself,  in  the  minds  of  most  men. 
The  reform  question  fell  into  something  like  oblivion. 
Mr.  Grey,  indeed,  raised  the  subject  in  Parliament  once 
or  twice,  but  each  time  apparently  with  less  chance  of 
success  and  with  diminished  favour.  Not  for  some  years 
after  the  fall  of  Napoleon,  and  the  temporarily  decisive 
victory  of  Waterloo,  did  the  subject  of  Parliamentary  re- 
form become  a  serious  question  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. It  was  not  allowed  to  lie  wholly  in  abeyance  all 
this  time.  Now  and  again  a  motion  was  brought  forward 
in  the  House  by  Sir  Francis  Burdett,  by  Lord  John  Rus- 
sell, by  the  Marquis  of  Blandford,  by  Lord  Howick,  son 


1 764-1845  Lord  Grey.  31 

of  Charles,  now  become  Earl  Grey,  and  by  other  men 
having  the  object  of  dealing  with  the  question,  or  with 
some  branch  of  it,  but  without  any  marked  result. 

Lord  Grey  was  still  the  recognised  leader  of  th:; 
reform  party.  He  had  been  the  friend  and  pupil  of  Fox. 
He  was  a  man  of  remarkable  energy  and  unbending 
character.  Macaulay  has  paid  a  well-merited  tribute  of 
praise  to  the  stately  eloquence  of  which  he  was  a  master. 
In  his  younger  days  he  had  been  one  of  the  managers  of 
the  famous  impeachment  of  Warren  Hastings,  He  ap- 
peared side  by  side  with  Burke  and  Fox  and  Sheridan  and 
Windham.  "Nor,"  as  Macaulay  says,  "though  surrounded 
by  such  men,  did  the  youngest  manager  pass  unnoticed." 
"  Those,"  adds  the  historian,  "  who  within  the  last  ten  years 
have  listened  with  delight  till  the  morning  sun  shone  on 
the  tapestries  of  the  House  of  Lords,  to  the  lofty  and 
animated  eloquence  of  Charles  Earl  Grey,  are  able  to 
form  some  estimate  of  the  powers  of  a  race  of  men 
amongst  whom  he  was  not  the  foremost."  Lord  Grey's 
eloquence  was  probably  of  a  kind  hardly  known  to  our 
time.  It  seems  to  have  been  measured,  stately,  grand, 
better  suited  to  illustrate  great  principles  and  advocate 
large  reforms,  than  to  deal  with  what  we  may  call  the 
mere  business  details  which  take  up  most  of  the  work  of 
Parliament  at  the  present  day.  Although  the  pupil  of 
Fox,  Lord  Grey  does  not  seem  to  have  caught  from  his 
master  any  of  that  spontaneous  and  impassioned  elo- 
quence which  has  been  described  by  Grattan  as  "  rolling 
in  resistless  as  the  waves  of  the  Atlantic."  Those, 
perhaps,  among  us  who  can  remember  the  lofty,  half- 
poetic  oratory  of  the  late  Lord  Ellenborough,  with  its 
diction  apparently  raised  above  the  level  of  ordinary 
events  and  common  debate,  will  have  a  better  impression 
of  the  style  of  eloquence  in  which  Lord  Grey  was  distin- 


32  The  Leaders  of  Reform.        179  2-1 840 

guished.  Lord  Grey  was  a  man  of  the  highest,  personal 
honour  and  character.  Nature  had  not,  perhaps,  given 
him  any  great  force  of  will  or  power  of  initiative.  He 
was  therefore  apt  to  be  sometimes  under  the  influence  of 
those  immediately  around  him.  He  was  said,  for  ex- 
ample, to  be  very  much  under  the  control  of  his  son-in- 
law,  Lord  Durham.  But  Lord  Grey  had  the  entire  con- 
fidence of  the  reformers  of  England,  and  was  in  every 
way  a  man  fitted  to  stand  between  Sovereign  and  people 
at  a  great  political  crisis.  He  had  the  courage  to  tell  a 
Sovereign  what  it  became  the  Sovereign's  duty  to  do, 
although  the  admonition  might  be  distasteful  to  royal 
ears,  and  he  had  the  firmness  not  to  allow  himself  to  be 
led  away  too  far  by  the  impatient  demands  of  a  reason- 
ably dissatisfied  people. 

The  reformers  out  of  doors  would  probably  not  have 
been  sorry  if  Lord  Durham's  influence  over  his  father-in 
law  had  been  even  greater  than  it  was  reported  to  be. 
Lord  Grey  was  ready  to  give  that  opportunity  to  younger 
men  which  the  leader  of  a  political  party  is  not  always 
found  considerate  enough  to  allow,  and  his  most  Radical 
colleague  at  that  time  was  Lord  Durham.  The  fame  of 
Lord  Durham  has  curiously  faded  and  become  dim  in 
our  day.  He  was  a  man  of  a  '  masterful '  character,  to 
adopt  an  expressive  provincial  word.  He  was  a  bold 
and  earnest  Radical,  going  much  further  in  some  of  his 
notions  on  the  subject  of  reform  than  most  of  the  pro- 
fessed Radicals  of  our  own  day  would  be  inclined  to  do. 
He  had  a  strong  and  resolute  will.  His  temper  was 
overbearing,  and  often  swept  away  his  judgment  in  its 
fitful  and  sudden  gusts.  He  was  too  sensitive  for  his  own 
happiness  or  his  success  as  a  politician.  Lord  Durham's 
political  career  was  short.  He  had  been  long  out  of 
politics  when   he   died   in   the  July  of  1840,  and  he  was 


1779"^^^^  Lord  Brougham.  33 

then  only  in  his  forty-ninth  year.  But  .at  the  time  we 
are  now  describing  he  was  the  hope  of  all  the  more  ad- 
vanced Radicals  of  the  country,  and  he  had  still  a  great 
career  before  him.  It  \->  fairly  to  be  called  a  great  career, 
although  it  was  a  failure  so  far  as  Lord  Durham's  poli- 
tical advancement  was  concerned.  Lord  Durham  was 
sent  out  to  settle  the  disturbances  in  misgoverned  and 
rebellious  Canada ;  and  he  founded  the  great,  prosper- 
ous, self-governing  country,  in  whose  fortunes  and  pro- 
gress we  all  now  take  so  deep  an  interest.  He  evolved 
order  out  of  chaos.  He  acted  for  the  time  as  a  dictator. 
He  had  to  reorganise  a  whole  country,  and  he  did  so 
without  much  regard  for  the  sort  of  system  which  bung- 
ling legislation  had  tried  in  vain  to  establish.  He  was 
recalled  ;  he  was  officially  disgraced ;  but  he  might  fairly 
have  said  that  he  had  saved  Canada.  A  Durham  sent 
to  Ireland  about  the  same  time,  and  allowed  to  follow 
out  the  guidance  of  his  genius  and  his  free  political 
principles,  might  have  unravelled  the  tangled  work  of 
blundering  centuries,  and  made  the  basis  of  a  thorough 
and  cordial  co-partnership  between  England  and  Ireland 
to  endure  forever. 

Among  the  chiefs  and  captains  of  reform  in  those  days 
there  was  one  more  widely  popular,  and  even  more 
strenuously  self-asserting,  than  Lord  Durham.  This  was 
Henry  Brougham,  soon  after  to  be  Lord  Chancellor. 
Brougham  was  unquestionably  the  most  energetic  re- 
former of  the  period.  His  talents  were  miscellaneous, 
brilliant,  and  his  capacity  for  labour  seemed  inexhausti- 
ble. He  delighted  in  work.  He  seemed  only  to  live 
and  enjoy  himself  in  work.  Even  his  relaxations  were 
of  an  eager,  exhaustive  kind.  He  had  tremendous  phy- 
sical strength,  great  animal  spirits,  and  an  unlimited 
belief  in  himself  and  admiration  for  himself.  It  was  im- 
D 


34  The  Leaders  of  Reform.  1792-X840 

possible  not  to  admire  his  genius,  and  not  sometimes  to 
laugh  at  his  vanity.  He  was  a  great  popular  and  par- 
liamentary orator.  His  style  was  too  rugged,  and  at  the 
same  time  too  diffuse,  for  a  time  like  ours.  His  passion 
would  now  seem  to  us  like  that  of  a  madman  ;  his  action 
and  his  gestures  would  be  intolerable  to  our  Parliament. 
He  sometimes  seemed  to  foam  at  the  mouth  in  the  fury 
of  debate,  and  on  one  occasion  at  least  he  went  through 
the  form  of  dropping  to  his  knees  in  order  to  make  his 
appeal  to  the  Peers  more  impressive.  At  the  time  of 
which  we  are  now  speaking,  he  filled  a  vast  space  in  the 
public  mind.  Untiring,  restless,  insatiable  of  praise, 
greedy  of  power,  capable  of  commanding  a  public  meet- 
ing almost  as  completely  as  O'Conncll,  he  naturally  be- 
came a  powerful  force  in  the  promotion  of  great  political 
and  social  reforms.  He  had  rendered  immense  service 
to  the  cause  of  liberty  and  to  that  of  education.  He  had 
been  the  most  uncompromising  enemy  to  the  system  of 
slavery  in  the  colonies.  It  was  his  voice  which  denounced 
"  the  wild  and  guilty  phantasy  "  that  man  can  have  pro- 
perty in  man.  He  was  a  law  reformer.  He  was  one  of 
the  founders  of  what  may  be  called  popular  education, 
and  an  advocate  of  religious  equality.  He  threw  himself 
for  a  time  with  all  the  wild,  coarse,  animal  energy  of  his 
nature  into  the  cause  of  political  reform. 

But  the  man  who  rendered  the  most  decided  service 
to  the  cause,  and  who,  during  the  whole  of  his  active 
career,  was  more  distinctly  identified  with  reform  than 
any  other  statesman,  was  Lord  John  Russell.  Russell 
was  not  a  man  of  genius,  and  he  never  became  an  orator. 
But  he  had  strength  of  character  and  of  will,  and  he  saw 
his  way  clearly  before  him.  During  the  whole  of  his  long 
career  he  was  never  turned  aside  by  a  personal  motive 
from  any  principle  of  policy.     He  was  a  ready,  keen, 


1 8 1 1  - 1 8  The  Luddites.  35 

penetrating  debater.  The  force  of  his  cold,  quiet  sarcasm 
told  irresistibly  on  any  weak  point  in  an  opponent's 
argument.  He  had  sat  at  the  feet  of  Fox.  He  loved 
literature  as  well  as  politics,  and  was  a  personal  friend  of 
most  of  the  great  literary  men  of  his  time.  Lord  John 
Russell,  more  than  any  other  man,  kept  the  light  of 
political  reform  burning  during  seasons  when  it  seemed 
almost  certain  that  it  must  go  out  altogether. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  EVE  OF  THE  REFORM  STRUGGLE- 
PARLIAMENT  assembled  on  February  4,  1830.  It  opened 
under  conditions  of  peculiar  gloom.  The  Royal  speech 
spoke  of  the  general  distress  from  which  commerce  and 
agriculture,  and  all  the  classes  that  depended  upon  either, 
were  suffering.  The  speech,  of  course,  did  not  do  more 
than  barely  allude  to  the  distressed  condition  of  the 
time.  The  state  of  the  working  men  in  many  parts  of  the 
country  was  little  better  than  that  of  starvation.  The 
best  of  the  silk  weavers  were  earning  only  an  average  of 
eight  or  nine  shillings  a  week,  and  in  some  larger  towns 
it  was  declared  that  many  thousands  of  working  people 
were  receiving  no  more  than  2}4d.^  day,  to  say  nothing  of 
the  large  numbers  who  were  out  of  employment  altogether. 
Many  of  the  working-men  ascribed  the  depression  in 
trade  to  the  introduction  of  machinery,  and  there  wcr3 
organised  gangs  of  workmen  going  through  the  country 
trying  to  break  and  destroy  all  machinery  which  they 
believed  to  interfere  with  their  trade.  They  followed  the 
example  of  the  Luddites  of  an  earlier  day,  who  used  to  go 
about  in  bands,  breaking  frames  and  machinery,  starting 
riots  in  various  places,  and  coming  into  collision  with 


36  The  Eve  of  the  Reform  Stmggle.  1830 

the  military,  and  of  whom  several  were  tried  and  executed 
from  the  year  181 1  to  1 818.  The  Luddites  took  their 
name  from  a  silly  creature,  really  an  idiot,  named  Ludd, 
who  had  once  broken  some  weaving  machinery  in  a  fit 
of  passion.  Perhaps  the  Luddites  will  be  remembered  by 
many  persons  in  our  time,  rather  because  of  Byron's  al- 
lusion to  them  than  by  reason  of  any  historical  mark 
they  have  made.  In  December  1816,  Byron  wrote  a 
little  ballad,  which  he  called  the  "  Song  of  the  Lud- 
dite,"  in  which  he  declares  that : 

As  the  Liberty  lads  o'er  the  sea 

Bought  their  freedom,  and  cheaply,  with  blood, 

So  we  boys,  we. 
Will  die  fighting,  or  live  free, 
And  down  with  all  kings  but  King  Ludd. 

Byron  wrote  to  Moore  apropos  of  this  poem,  asking 
"  Are  you  not  near  the  Luddites  ?  By  the  Lord,  if  there's 
a  row,  but  I'll  be  among  ye.  How  go  on  the  weavers, 
the  breakers  of  frames,  the  Lutherans  of  politics,  the  re- 
formers ?" 

The  policy  of  the  Luddites  was  foolishly  followed  out 
by  some  of  the  working-men  in  1830.  It  is  likely  enough 
that  the  machinery  did  for  the  moment  disturb  their  trade 
and  interfere  with  employment,  and  men  with  wives  and 
families  suffering  from  starvation  cannot  be  expected  to 
have  the  patient  temper  of  economists  and  philosophers. 
It  is  certain,  however,  that  the  outbursts  of  anger  and 
violence  tended  only  to  make  their  condition  more  dis- 
tressed and  miserable,  and  that  the  machinery  against 
which  they  protested  was  destined  to  multiply  the  opera- 
tions of  the  trade  and  to  give  additional  and  vastly  in- 
creased employment  to  numbers  of  men  and  women. 
The  country  was  in  such  deep  distress  that  Lord  Stanhope 


1830  The  Need  of  the  Reforvi  Bill.  37 

in  the  House  of  Lords,  moved  an  amendment  to  the  Ad- 
dress, stating  that  agriculture,  trade,  commerce,  and  manu- 
factures had  never  before  at  any  one  time  been  in  so  disas- 
trous a  condition.  The  Duke  of  Wellington,  on  the  other 
hand,  contended  in  the  true  fashion  of  the  Minister  of 
State,  that  although  there  was  suffering  in  some  parts  of 
the  country,  yet  on  the  whole  the  condition  of  things  was 
improving.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  point  out  how 
illusory,  an  answer  this  is  to  a  special  appeal.  There  was 
deep  distress  in  certain  parts  of  the  country,  which, 
according  to  the  argument  pressed  on  the  Government, 
might  be  relieved  by  a  wise  system  of  commercial  legis- 
lation. It  was  no  answer  whatever  to  such  an  appeal  to 
say  that  the  country  on  the  whole  was  more  prosperous 
than  it  had  been  before.  It  would  be  just  as  reasonable 
if  some  complaint  were  made  of  the  want  of  fire- 
engines  in  a  particular  quarter  of  the  town  which  had 
lately  been  ravaged  by  a  conflagration,  to  say  that, 
taking  the  country  all  over,  the  average  of  fires  was  less 
than  it  had  been  for  some  years  previous.  In  the  House 
of  Commons  Sir  Francis  Burdett  denounced  the  Duke  of 
Wellington  as  "  shamefully  insensible  to  the  suffering  and 
distress  which  were  painfully  apparent  through  the  land." 
O'ConncU,  in  the  course  of  the  debate,  declared  that 
many  thousands  of  persons  had  to  subsist  in  Ireland  on 
three  halfpence  per  day.  A  tolerably  successful  working- 
man  sometimes  got  7.S.  6d.  a  week,  and  at  this  time  the 
four-pound  loaf  cost  \od.  Sir  James  Graham  suggested 
a  reduction  in  the  salaries  of  Government  officials.  Mr. 
Hume,  true  to  the  purpose  of  his  life,  proposed  that 
8,ooo,oco/.  should  be  saved  from  the  expenses  of  the 
army  and  navy.  Mr.  Poulett  Thompson  moved  for  i. 
Committee  of  Inquiry  into  the  whole  system  of  taxation. 
Sir  Robert  Peel  accepted  none  of  these  suggestions  and 


38  The  Eve  of  the  Reform  Struggle.  1830 

recommendations.  The  Ministry  managed  tolerably  well 
in  their  financial  measures,  and  contrived  to  have  a  con- 
siderable surplus  to  show.  The  early  part  of  the  session 
was  marked,  so  far  as  political  reform  was  concerned,  only 
by  Lord  John  Russell's  introduction  of  a  measure  to  give 
members  to  Manchester,  Liverpool,  and  Leeds,  and  one 
introduced  by  Mr.  O'Connell  to  introduce  universal 
suffrage  and  vote  by  ballot.  Both  these  measures  were 
rejected. 

Nothing  could  well  have  seemed  gloomier  than  the 
prospect  of  popular  reform  in  England.  The  most 
earnest  and  courageous  of  the  reformers  must  have  felt 
their  spirits  sink  within  them  as  the  early  months  of  1830 
went  on.  The  unforeseen,  however,  then  as  in  other 
cases,  came  to  pass.  Just  at  the  moment  when  the  light 
seemed  on  the  point  of  dying  out,  events  occurred  which 
combined  to  set  it  suddenly  aflame  again,  more  brightly 
than  ever.  The  first  of  these  events  was  the  death  of 
George  IV.  on  June  26,  1830.  George  had  begun  his 
public  life  as  an  avowed  Whig.  He  was  a  friend  and 
boon  companion  of  Fox  and  Sheridan.  It  is  certain 
that  Fox  and  Sheridan  beheved  him  to  be  their  close 
political  ally  as  well.  There  was  in  fact  a  Prince's  party 
in  the  State.  The  Prince  of  Wales  was  believed  to  be 
the  direct  opponent  of  the  policy  favoured  and  enforced 
by  the  King.  The  Whig  millennium  was  looked  for 
when  George  should  succeed  to  his  father's  throne.  It 
was  in  his  eagerness  to  have  George  made  Regent  during 
his  father's  first  attack  of  insanity  that  Fox  actually  pro- 
pounded the  doctrine  that  the  Prince  of  Wales  was 
entitled  to  become  Regent  independently  of  any  decision 
of  Parliament.  This  strange  profession  of  political  faith 
caused  Pitt  to  declare  in  exultation  that  he  would  "un- 
"VV'hig  "  the  gentleman  for  the  rest  of  his  life.  Fox,  indeed, 


1830  George  IV.  39 

had  for  the  moment  been  betrayed  into  a  repudiation  of 
one  of  the  first  and  most  essential  principles  of  Liberal- 
ism.    No  wonder  that  his  great  rival  exulted. 

George  had  given  new  hope  to  Ireland,  and  was  at 
one  time  all  but  adored  by  the  Irish  people.  Moore 
sang  his  praise  and  O'Connell  glorified  him,  at  the  time 
when  Byron  was  heaping  unmeasured  scorn  on  him  in 
"  the  Irish  avatar."  Byron  himself,  indeed,  had  once  be- 
lieved in  the  Prince.  Moore  afterwards  denounced  him 
bitterly  in  song.  George  disappointed  others  as  well  as 
Moore.  Once  before  he  had  turned  suddenly  against  the 
Whigs,  and  separated  himself  publicly  and  formally  from 
them.  In  May,  1792,  he  delivered  in  the  House  of  Lords 
a  speech  in  which  he  announced  that  he  could  not  accept 
the  views  on  the  French  Revolution  which  Fox  and  his 
friends  still  continued  to  hold.  There  was  after  this  a 
renewal  more  than  once  of  the  friendly  relations  between 
the  Prince  and  Fox,  and  the  hopes  of  the  Whigs  were 
drawn  to  the  Prince  Regent  again.  It  was  long  after  this 
that  P'ox,  in  his  eagerness  for  the  Prince,  laid  himself 
open  to  the  rebuke  of  Pitt,  and  it  was  still  later,  and  after 
he  had  become  king,  that  George  revisited  Ireland.  But 
from  the  moment  when  the  Prince  became  Regent  he 
showed  that  the  Whigs  had  nothing  to  expect  from  him, 
and  in  his  reign  as  Sovereign  he  held  distinctly  and 
doggedly  by  the  principles  and  the  political  creed  of  the 
Tories.  George  has  left  a  poor  name  in  English  history. 
His  vices  were  many ;  his  virtues  few.  But  it  is  not 
perhaps  sufficiently  borne  in  mind  that  he  was  kept  in  a 
pitiful  state  of  pupilage  by  his  father's  orders  during 
years  that  almost  approached  to  manhood.  His  life  was 
spent  up  to  about  the  age  of  eighteen  in  a  sort  of  scho- 
lastic imprisonment,  now  in  Windsor,  now  in  Kew,  and 
now  in  Buckingham  Palace.     He  was  treated  by  his  fa* 


40  JTu  Eve  of  the  Reform  Struggle.  1830 

ther  very  much  as  Joe  Willett,  in  "  Barnaby  Rudge"  is 
treated  by  Old  John.  Joe  Willett,  however,  could  run 
away  and  George  could  not;  and  Joe  Willett  had  a  noble 
nature  and  George  certainly  had  not.  But  it  is  only  right 
to  point  out  that  the  career  of  George,  on  his  emerging  at 
last  from  duresse,  was  not  very  unlike  what  reasonable 
men  would  have  looked  for  as  the  result  of  sudden  li- 
cense after  long  and  undue  restraint. 

Everyone  had  come  to  know  that  reform  had  no 
chance  while  George  IV.  lived.  When  he  died,  there- 
fore, the  hopes  of  the  reformers  sprang  up  anew.  Wil- 
liam IV.  succeeded,  and  although  William  had  strongly 
opposed  Liberal  policy  and  Liberal  principles  in  many 
important  questions,  yet  it  was  considered  that  he  came 
to  the  throne  unpledged  on  the  subject  of  Parliamentary 
reform.  It  was  hoped  that  he  would  be  glad  to  renew 
the  popularity  of  his  early  days,  and  it  was  presumed 
that  the  influence  of  public  opinion  could  not  be  without 
some  effect  on  his  reign.  The  Duke  of  Wellington  and 
Sir  Robert  Peel  were  the  leaders  of  the  Ministry  when 
George  IV.  died.  "The  Sailor  King,"  as  he  was  called, 
was  thought  to  be  of  a  genial  and  conciliatory  disposi- 
tion, and  it  was  supposed  that  men  of  more  progressive 
political  opinions  than  Wellington  or  Peel  might  have 
some  chance  of  influencing  his  public  conduct. 

Parliament  was  dissolved,  by  proclamation,  on  July 
24,  1830.  The  Liberals  went  to  the  country  full  of  hope 
and  spirit,  although  they  little  dreamed  that  an  event 
which  was  about  to  happen  in  another  land  was  destined 
to  give  a  new  and  most  important  impulse  to  the  cause 
which  they  had  at  heart. 

It  might  be  thought  that  men  whose  principles  were 
so  poorly  represented  among  the  constituencies  could 
hare  little  hopes  from  the  general  election.     But  at  all 


1830  The  WMgs.  41 

times,  even  under  the  narrowest  suffrage,  it  is  certain 
that  in  a  country  like  this  a  strong  public  feeling  exer- 
cises some  control  over  the  votes  of  the  electoral  body. 
No  matter  how  g^reatthe  influence  of  landlords  and  local 
magnates,  no  matter  how  vast  and  lavish  the  bribery  and 
corruption,  yet  a  vigorous  breath  of  public  opinion  does 
in  some  manner  contrive  to  force  its  way  into  the  elec- 
toral body,  and  to  impel  them  in  the  direction  which  the 
popular  sentiment  is  taking.  Besides,  it  must  be  owned 
that  so  far  as  territorial  influence  and  influence  of  money 
went,  the  Whigs  of  that  day  were  not  ashamed  to  com- 
pete, as  far  as  possible,  with  their  opponents.  The  state 
of  the  franchise  in  the  great  towns,  as  we  have  already 
explained,  left  the  constituency  peculiarly  open  to  the  in- 
fluences of  bribery,  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
Liberals,  whenever  they  had  a  chance,  availed  them- 
selves of  the  opportunity  thus  given.  At  all  events,  the 
two  parties  were  not  so  entirely  disproportionate  in 
strength  as  the  condition  of  things  might  lead  a  reader  to 
expect. 

Suddenly,  however,  the  unlooked-for  event  occurred 
which  turned  the  balance  in  favour  of  the  Whigs,  and 
roused  a  popular  feeling  all  over  the  country  which  the 
narrow  electorate  found  it  difficult  to  resist.  This  event 
was  the  Revolution  of  1830  in  France.  Everyone  who 
studies  with  any  attention  the  history  of  England,  and 
especially  of  political  and  Parliamentary  movements  in 
England,  will  have  observed  the  remarkable  manner  in 
which  events  in  this  country  follow  the  lead  of  events  on 
the  Continent.  If  there  were  direct  electrical  or  magnetic 
connection  between  Continental  Europe  and  the  English 
public  mind  there  could  hardly  be  a  more  direct  connec- 
tion between  events  on  this  side  of  the  Channel  and 
events  on  the  other.    Revolution  on  the  Continent  always 


42  The  Eve  of  the  Reform  Struggle.  1830 

in  the  first  instance  impels  the  cause  of  popular  agitation  in 
this  country.  Then,  it  may  be,  the  revolution  goes  too  far, 
and  reaction  sets  in  here  for  a  time.  Reform  is  dreaded 
and  detested,  and  men  think  they  can  hardly  go  far 
enough  back  in  the  opposite  direction.  Then,  again,  it 
maybe  that  the  wildness  of  the  revolutionary  movement 
subsides  in  France,  or  in  whatever  Continental  countries 
it  dominates.  Institutions  seem  to  emerge  safer  and 
stronger  than  before  from  the  welter  of  parties,  and  at 
once  a  new  effect  is  produced  in  England,  and  the  pop- 
ular movement  receives  a  fresh  impulse.  The  Revolution 
in  France  took  place  because  the  French  Ministry',  dis- 
appointed at  finding  that  each  election  produced  a  Cham- 
ber of  Deputies  more  opposed  to  the  arbitrary  power  ot 
the  King  and  his  advisers,  and  that  the  journals  became 
more  and  more  outspoken  in  their  condemnation  of  the 
system  of  government,  issued  a  body  of  ordinances, 
changing  practically  the  whole  Constitution  of  the  coun- 
try, and  superseding  or  destroying  the  liberty  of  the 
Press.  The  French  Ministry  overdid  their  part.  They 
went  far  beyond  any  limit  which  the  people  of  Paris 
could  tolerate.  There  was  an  insurrection  for  which  the 
Government  were  wholly  unprepared,  and  after  the  fa- 
mous struggle  in  Paris,  known  as  the  Three  Days  of 
July,  the  King  abdicated  in  favour  of  his  grandson,  but 
abdicated  in  vain.  The  Revolution  was  complete  so  far 
as  the  elder  branch  of  the  family  was  concerned.  Charles 
escaped  to  England.  The  white  flag,  the  symbol  of 
French  legitimacy,  was  flung  away ;  the  tricolor  was  sub- 
stituted ;  the  Duke  of  Orleans,  Louis  Philippe,  became 
King  of  the  French,  "  King  of  the  Barricades,"  as  he  was 
afterwards  called,  and  crowned  his  strange  life  of  soldier- 
ing, of  exile,  of  school  teaching,  of  wandering,  by  be- 
coming for  the  time  the  most  popular  monarch  of  Europe. 


1830  Defeat  of  the  Tory  Government.  43 

This  event  promised  to  bring  about  an  entirely  new 
chapter  in  the  history  of  France.  The  effect  on  Enghsh 
popular  opinion  was  so  strong,  that  after  the  general  elec- 
tion the  Tory  Government  found  that  it  had  lost  at  least 
fifty  votes  in  the  House  of  Commons,  and  that  its  influ- 
ence all  over  the  country  was  reduced  to  little  better  than 
a  nullity. 


CHAPTER  V. 

INTRODUCTION   OF  THE   REFORM    BILL. 

The  new  Parliament  met  on  October  26,  1830.  During 
the  interval  between  the  Revolution  in  France  and  the 
assembling  of  Parliament  there  had  been  many  symp- 
toms in  England  of  a  widespread  popular  discontent,  and 
a  determination  to  have  some  change  in  the  policy  of  the 
Government.  Incendiary  fires  alarmed  many  parts  of  the 
country  in  September  and  October,  great  public  meetings 
were  held  in  various  cities  and  towns,  and  tumultuous 
demands  were  made  for  the  dismissal  of  the  Tory  Min- 
isters. 

The  actual  work  of  the  session  began  on  November  2. 
On  that  day  the  King  came  to  the  House  and  delivered 
his  speech  in  person.  A  debate  arose  in  the  House  of 
Lords  on  the  Address,  and  during  this  discussion  the 
Duke  of  Wellington  made  his  declaration  with  regard  to 
parliamentary  reform.  Replying  to  a  speech  from  Lord 
Grey,  the  Duke  declared  distinctly  that  he  had  never 
read  or  heard  of  any  measure  which  could  in  any  de- 
gree satisfy  his  mind  "  that  the  state  of  representation 
could  be  improved  or  be  rendered  more  satisfactory  to 
the  country  at  large  than  at  the  present  moment."  "  I  am 
fully  convinced,"  he  said,  "  that  the  country  possesses  a 


44  Introduction  of  the  Reform  Bill.  1830 

legislature  which  answers  all  the  good  purposes  of  legis- 
lation, and  this  to  a  greater  degree  than  any  legislature 
has  answered  in  any  other  country  whatever."  He  went 
further.  He  declared  that  not  only  the  legislature  but 
the  system  of  representation  possessed  deservedly  the  full 
and  entire  confidence  of  the  country.  He  therefore  de- 
clared plainly  that  he  was  not  prepared  to  bring  forward 
any  measure  of  reform.  Not  only,  he  said,  was  he  not 
prepared  to  bring  forward  any  such  measure,  but :  "  I  will 
at  once  declare  that,  as  far  as  I  am  concerned,  so  long  as 
I  hold  any  station  in  the  Government  of  the  country,  I 
shall  always  feel  it  my  duty  to  resist  such  a  measure  when 
proposed  by  others." 

The  Tory  Ministry'  from  that  moment  became  odious 
to  the  people.  Never  before  perhaps  was  an  administra- 
tion so  unpopular  in  England.  The  "  Patriot-King,"  on 
the  other  hand,  was  extolled  to  the  skies,  as  the  most 
hopeful  Prince  who  had  ever  mounted  the  throne.  The 
Whigs  now  believed  they  saw  their  way  to  the  over- 
throw of  the  Tory  Ministry,  and  the  Ministry  began  them- 
selves to  feel  that  they  could  not  long  stand  up  against 
the  demands  of  the  country.  The  end  came  about  per- 
haps even  sooner  than  they  had  expected.  On  Novem- 
ber 14,  Sir  Henry  Parnell,  afterwards  Lord  Congleton, 
brought  forward  a  motion  in  the  House  of  Commons  for 
the  appointment  of  a  select  committee  "  to  take  into  con- 
sideration the  estimates  and  amounts  proposed  by  His 
Majesty  regarding  the  civil  list."  The  Government 
strongly  opposed  the  motion,  but  it  was  carried  in  spite  of 
their  teeth  by  a  majority  of  twenty-nine.  The  question 
was  hardly  one  of  capital  importance  in  itself,  but  the 
Government  foresaw  that  if  they  did  not  resign  on  that  occa- 
sion they  would  probably  be  forced  to  surrender  very  soon 
after  on  some  subject  of  graver  moment.     They  therefore 


1830  Lord  Grcy^ s  Ministry.  45 

thought  it  wise  to  tender  their  resignation  the  morning 
after  their  defeat.  Perhaps  too  they  thought  it  would  be 
a  clever  party  stroke  to  resign  after  a  defeat  which  seemed 
to  exhibit  them  as  champions  and  defenders  of  the  royal 
prerogative  in  opposition  to  Whig  assailants.  At  all 
events,  they  made  up  their  minds  to  tender  their  resigna- 
tion. The  resignation  was  accepted,  and  the  same  even- 
ing both  Houses  of  Parliament  knew  that  the  Tory  Min- 
istry had  come  to  an  end. 

^  Lord  Grey  was  at  once  sent  for  by  the  King  and  invited 
to  form  a  Ministry.  This  was  of  course  only  what  every- 
one expected.  Lord  Grey  consented  to  take  office  on 
condition  that  the  reform  of  Parliament  should  be  made 
a  Cabinet  measure.  Some  difficulty  arose  during  the  ar- 
rangements about  finding  a  position  for  Lord  Brougham. 
Lord  Brougham  was  the  most  powerful  Whig  orator  in 
the  House  of  Commons.  He  had  a  considerable  number 
of  followers  of  his  own,  and  what  with  his  great  abilities 
and  energies,  and  the  strength  of  his  popularity,  he  might 
have  made  it  hardly  possible  for  a  Whig  ministry  to  keep 
in  power  without  his  support  or  in  spite  of  him.  Some  of 
the  Whigs  thought  there  was  no  living  with  him  or  with- 
out him.  But  at  all  events  it  was  necessary  to  make  the 
experiment  of  living  with  him,  since  living  without  him 
would  have  been  manifestly  impossible.  Lord  Grey  of- 
fered him  the  place  of  Attorney-General,  which  Lord 
Brougham  absolutely  declined.  Lord  Grey  suggested 
that  he  should  be  Master  of  the  Rolls  and  remain  still  in 
Parliament,  but  to  this  the  King  objected.  The  Prime 
Minister  pointed  out  to  the  King  that  he  could  hardly 
venture  to  carry  on  the  Government  if  Lord  Brougham 
remained  in  the  House  of  Commons  under  the  conviction 
that  he  had  been  ill  used  by  the  party.  William  then 
suggested  that  he  should  be  Lord  Chancellor,  and  Lord 


46  Introduction  of  the  Reform  Bill.  1830 

Grey  explained  that  this  was  what  he  himself  would 
have  been  disposed  to  recommend,  but  that  the  King 
had  refused  to  allow  Lord  Brougham  to  be  appointed  to 
the  inferior  office  of  Master  of  the  Rolls.  The  King's 
objection,  however,  was  reasonable  enough.  Events 
afterwards  proved  that  if  William  had  wished  to  disarm 
Lord  Brougham  the  course  taken  was  politic  and  wise. 
Brougham,  as  Master  of  the  Rolls,  was  to  have  retained 
his  seat  in  the  House  of  Commons,  and  would  have  been 
a  most  formidable  power  there,  either  against  the  Min- 
istry, or  the  King,  or  both  combined.  As  Lord  Chan- 
cellor he  sank  into  a  position  comparatively  uninfluential. 
He  hesitated  for  a  while  about  accepting  the  place,  but 
at  last  he  was  persuaded  into  it  by  Lord  Grey  and  Lord 
Althorp. 

Lord  Grey  of  course  was  at  the  head  of  the  new 
Government.  Lord  Durham  was  Lord  Privy  Seal.  Lord 
Althorp  became  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  and 
leader  of  the  House  of  Commons.  Lord  Althorp  was  a 
plain,  straightforsvard  country  gentleman,  with  a  great 
taste  for  farming  and  no  personal  inclination  for  political 
life.  He  was  not  even  a  tolerably  good  speaker.  But 
his  plain,  homespun  ability,  his  straightforward  manners, 
his  sound  judgment  and  his  absolute  disinterestedness 
made  him  a  genuine  power  in  Parliament.  Perhaps  the 
House  of  Commons  has  never  had  a  leader  in  whom  it 
placed  a  fuller  confidence.  Once  in  replying  to  some 
opponent.  Lord  Althorp  remarked  that  the  gentleman's 
arguments  were  plausible  but  unsound.  "  I  do  not,"  he 
said  composedly,  "recollect  now  the  reasons  which 
prove  his  objections  to  be  groundless ;  but  I  know  that 
those  reasons  were  perfectly  satisfactory  to  my  own 
mind."  Lord  Russell,  who  tells  the  story,  adds  that 
"the   House  voted,   by  a  great  majority,   against  the 


1830  Lord  Grcf  s  Ministry.  47 

plausible  arguments,  and  in  favour  of  the  unknown  re- 
plies." This  assuredly  was  carrying  confidence  about  as 
far  as  devotion  itself  could  bear  it.  Lord  Melbourne  was 
Home  Secretary,  and  Lord  Palmerston  entered  for  the 
first  time  into  that  office  with  which  his  career  and  his 
fame  were  afterwards  especially  identified — the  office  of 
Secretary  for  Foreign  Affairs.  Lord  John  Russell  was 
Paymaster  of  the  Forces,  and  had  not  a  seat  in  the  Cabi- 
net. Mr.  Stanley,  afterwards  Lord  Derby,  became  Irish 
Secretary.  The  Lord  Chancellor  for  Ireland,  Lord  Plun- 
ket,  was,  as  a  parliamentary  orator,  at  least  the  peer  of 
his  English  colleague  Lord  Brougham. 

Immediately  after  Lord  Grey  had  formed  his  Ministry, 
Lord  Durham  asked  Lord  John  Russell  to  call  upon  him 
at  his  house  in  Cleveland  Row.  Lord  Durham  there 
explained  that  Lord  Grey  wished  him  to  consult  Lord 
John  with  respect  to  the  formation  of  a  committee  to 
draw  up  the  outlines  of  a  plan  of  political  reform.  After 
some  deliberation  it  was  agreed  to  invite  Sir  James 
Graham,  then  First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty,  and  Lord 
Duncannon,  Commissioner  of  Woods  and  Forests,  to 
form  a  committee  for  the  purpose,  with  Lord  Durham 
and  Lord  John  Russell.  Lord  Durham  then  asked  Lord 
John  Russell  to  draw  for  the  consideration  of  the  com- 
mittee, a  sketch  of  the  principal  heads  of  the  measure  of 
reform  which  he  could  submit  to  Lord  Grey,  and  which 
if  approved  by  Lord  Grey  would  be  proposed  to  the 
Cabinet.  Lord  John  Russell  himself,  in  his  work,  "  The 
English  Government  and  Constitution,"  thus  describes 
the  principle  on  which  he  proceeded  in  shaping  a  Reform 
Bill.  "  It  was  not  my  duty,"  he  says,  "  to  cut  the  body  of 
our  old  parent  to  pieces  and  to  throw  it  into  a  Medea's 
cauldron  with  the  hopes  of  reviving  the  strength  and 
vigour  of  youth."    He  made  up  his  mind  not  "to  deviate 


48  Introduction  of  the  Reform  Bill.  1830 

from  the  track  of  the  Constitution  into  the  maze  of  fancy, 
or  the  wildcrress  of  abstract  rights."  "  It  was  desirable, 
in  short,  as  it  appeared  to  me,  while  sweeping  away 
gross  abuses,  to  avail  ourselves  as  far  as  possible  of  the 
existing  frame  and  body  of  our  Institutions.  Thus,  if  the 
due  weight  and  influence  of  property  could  be  maintained 
by  preserving  the  representation  of  a  proportion  of  the 
small  boroughs  with  an  improved  franchise,  it  was  de- 
sirable rather  to  build  on  the  old  foundations  than  to 
indulge  our  fancy  or  our  conceit  in  choosing  a  new  site 
and  erecting  on  new  soil— perhaps  on  sand — an  edifice 
entirely  different  from  all  which  had  hitherto  existed." 
But  Lord  John  Russell  goes  on  to  say  that  at  the  same 
time  he  was  deeply  impressed  with  Lord  Grey's  convic- 
tion that  none  but  a  large  measure  would  be  a  safe  mea- 
sure; "that  to  nibble  at  disfranchisement  and  cramp 
reform  by  pedantic  adherence  to  existing  rights,  would 
be  to  deceive  expectation,  to  whet  appetite,  and  to  bring 
on  that  revolution  which  it  was  our  object  to  avert." 

Lord  John  Russell  accordingly  drew  up  a  plan  which 
he  presented  to  Lord  Durham,  and  on  which  Lord  Dur- 
ham noted  certain  amendments  of  his  own.  Lord  John 
Russell,  in  the  introduction  to  his  "  English  Government 
and  Constitution,"  publishes  his  sketch  of  a  reform  bill. 
It  was  written  on  a  single  sheet  of  letter  paper,  and  is 
reproduced  with  Lord  Durham's  original  corrections, 
erasures  and  alterations.  The  first  paragraph  proposes 
that  fifty  boroughs  of  the  smallest  population  according 
to  the  census  of  182 1  should  be  disfranchised.  Lord 
Durham  writes  "  approved  "  across  this  clause,  and  adds 
in  the  margin,  "  this  would  disfranchise  all  boroughs  of 
fourteen  hundred  inhabitants."  Clause  two  proposes 
that  fifty  more  of  the  least  considerable  should  send  in 
future  only  one  member  to  Parliaftient.     This  also   Lord 


1830  Lord  John  RusselF  s  Reform  Bill.  49 

Durham  marks  with  approval,  and  writes  in  the  margin 
"  this  would  apply  to  boroughs  of  three  thousand  inha- 
bitants." Clause  three  proposes  that  persons  qualified 
to  serve  on  juries  should  have  the  right  of  voting.  This 
clause  Lord  Durham  strikes  out.  Clause  four  recom- 
mends that  no  person  should  vote  in  cities  or  boroughs, 
except  in  the  city  of  London,  Westminster  and  South- 
wark,  unless  he  is  a  householder  rated  at  10/.  a  year,  and 
had  paid  his  parochial  taxes  for  three  years  within  three 
months  after  they  became  due,  and  had  resided  in  the 
city  or  borough  for  six  months  previous  to  the  election. 
On  that  clause  Lord  Durham  makes  no  remark.  Clause 
five  proposes  that  eighteen  large  towns  shall  send  mem- 
bers to  Parliament,  that  the  unrepresented  parts  of  Lon- 
don shall  send  four  or  six  additional  members,  and  that 
twenty  counties  shall  send  two  additional  members  each. 
All  this  Lord  Durham  approves.  Clause  six  gives  the 
right  of  voting  in  the  new  towns  to  householders  rated 
at  10/.  a  year,  or  persons  qualified  to  serve  on  juries. 
Lord  Durham  strikes  out  the  jury  qualification.  Clause 
seven  gave  to  copy  holders  and  leaseholders  having  an 
interest  of  more  than  twenty-one  years  a  right  to  vote  in 
the  counties.  This  Lord  Durham  approves.  Clause 
eight  relates  to  the  poll  to  be  taken  in  the  hundreds  of 
divisions  of  counties;  clause  nine  to  the  closing  of  the 
poll  in  cities  and  boroughs  on  the  second  day.  Clause 
ten  proposes  that  no  new  right  of  voting  shall  be  acquired 
in  counties  by  any  property  of  less  value  than  10/.  a 
year.  This  tenth  and  last  clause  Lord  Durham  strikes 
out.  The  Committee  discussed  the  right  of  voting  for 
boroughs  and  agreed  that  it  should  be  uniform,  their 
opinion  being  that  the  freemen  and  the  scot  and  lot 
voters  (a  class  of  persons  who  paid  rates  not  on  the 
same  scale  as  their  wealthier  neighbours,  but  were  rated 
£ 


^/ 


5o  Introduction  of  the  Reform  Bill.  1830 

in  proportion  to  their  means)  had,  in  process  of  time, 
become  generally  either  dependent  or  corrupt.  They 
endeavoured  to  find  a  qualification  which  should  give  the 
vote  to  the  greatest  number  of  independent  men,  and 
yet  be  as  nearly  as  possible  an  equivalent  for  the  old 
household  right  of  voting  of  the  seventeenth  century, 
and  this  qualification  they  believed  they  had  arrived  at 
when  they  fixed  the  borough  franchise  at  10/.  At  one 
of  the  last  sittings  of  the  Committee  vote  by  ballot  was 
introduced  into  the  scheme,  we  believe  at  the  suggestion 
of  Lord  Durham,  and  adopted  by  the  Committee;  this 
proposal  was  afterwards  omitted  by  the  Cabinet,  and  it 
had  been  strongly  opposed  in  the  Committee  by  Lord 
John  Russell.  Thus  altered,  the  plan,  approved  by  Lord 
Grey,  was  adopted  by  the  Cabinet.  Lord  Grey  sub- 
mitted it  to  the  King,  by  whom,  says  Lord  John  Russell, 
"  it  was  readily  and  cheerfully  sanctioned." 

The  ministerial  secret  was  well  kept.  It  was  thought 
to  be  of  great  importance  that  the  enemies  of  all  reform 
should  not  know  what  the  Government  had  to  propose 
until  the  moment  came  for  introducing  the  scheme  to 
Parliament.  More  than  thirty  persons  were  in  the  secret, 
and  yet  so  much  discretion  was  shown  by  all  that  not  the 
faintest  whisper  of  the  contents  of  the  Reform  Bill  got 
out  before  the  hour  of  its  actual  presentation  to  the 
House  of  Commons.  The  Bill  was  introduced  on 
Tuesday,  March  i,  1831.  Lord  John  Russell  had  been 
specially  selected  by  the  Government  to  introduce  the 
Bill,  because  of  the  perseverance  and  ability  with  which 
he  had  advocated  the  cause  of  reform.  It  is  worthy  of 
notice  that  Lord  John  Russell  not  only  introduced  the 
Reform  Bill,  but  was  the  first  to  adopt  the  name  of 
Reformer  as  the  designation  of  his  own  party,  and  to 
recognize  the  existence  of  the  word  Conservative  as  a 


1 83 1  The  Bill  brought  in.  51 

description  of  the  opposite  school.  The  first  of  March 
was  a  day  of  intense  excitement  and  even  tumult  in  the 
House  of  Commons.  Never  before  in  that  generation 
had  there  been  so  great  a  crowd  of  persons  eager  to  get 
places  in  the  House.  Every  inch  of  available  space  was 
occupied  long  before  the  business  of  the  House  began. 
When  the  doors  of  the  various  galleries  were  opened 
there  was  struggle,  clamour,  and  confusion  such  as  wc 
generally  associate  with  the  gallery  entrance  of  a  theatre 
on  Boxing-night.  Indeed,  it  required  a  threat  from  the 
Speaker  that  he  would  have  the  galleries  cleared  before 
order  could  be  restored  and  silence  obtained.  Then 
there  was  a  further  wrangle  among  the  members  them- 
selves, some  complaining  that  their  seats,  although 
marked  with  their  cards,  had  been  taken  by  others. 

At  last  Lord  John  Russell's  time  came.  He  began 
his  speech  in  a  low  voice  amid  profound  silence.  He 
never  was  an  orator  capable  of  commanding  tlie  emo- 
tions of  a  large  and  popular  assembly.  His  manner, 
even  at  its  best,  was  cold  and  inanimate.  On  this  occa- 
sion he  was  naturally  made  nervous  by  the  task  he  had 
before  him,  and  he  is  described  as  having  spoken  for  the 
most  part  in  a  lower  tone  and  with  less  animation  even 
than  was  usual  with  him.  Lord  John  Russell  explained 
that  the  Ministry  wished  to  take  their  stand  between  two 
extreme  hostile  parties,  neither  agreeing  with  the  bigotry 
of  those  who  would  reject  all  reform,  nor  with  the  fanati- 
cism of  those  who  would  admit  only  one  plan  of  reform. 
He  showed  that  at  an  early  period  the  ancient  constitu- 
tion of  the  country  recognized  fully  the  right  of  popular 
representation,  and  that  a  statute  had  provided  that  each 
county  should  send  to  the  Commons  two  knights  of  the 
shire,  each  city  two  burgesses,  and  each  borough  two 
members.      This  practice,   however,   fell    into   disuse ; 


52  Introduction  of  the  Rcf or ::i  Bill.  1831 

innovations  and  alterations  crept  in  which  all  operated 
against  the  representative  principle,  and  though  at  the 
early  period  to  which  Lord  John  Russell  referred  the 
House  of  Commons,  as  he  explained,  did  represent  the 
people  of  England,  there  could  be  no  doubt  that  the 
House  of  Commons  as  it  existed  in  March,  i83i,had 
long  ceased  to  have  any  really  representative  character. 
One  passage  in  Lord  John  Russell's  speech  was  very 
remarkable,  and  has  often  been  quoted.  He  assumed 
the  case  of  a  stranger  arriving  in  England,  finding  it  un- 
equalled in  wealth,  and  enjoying  more  civilization  and 
more  enlightenment  than  any  country  before  it,  finding 
that  it  prided  itself  on  its  freedom,  and  on  its  representa- 
tives elected  from  its  population  at  stated  periods  to  act  as 
the  guardians  and  preservers  of  that  freedom.  He  de- 
scribes the  anxiety  of  this  stranger  to  know  how  the  people 
formed  and  secured  their  representation  and  chose  their 
representatives.  "  What,  then,  would  be  his  surprise," 
Lord  John  Russell  said,  "  if  he  were  taken  by  the  guide 
whom  he  had  asked  to  conduct  him  to  one  of  those 
places  of  election,  to  a  green  mound  and  told  that  that 
green  mound  sent  two  members  to  Parliament  ?  or  to  be 
taken  to  a  stone  wall  with  three  niches  in  it,  and  told 
that  those  three  niches  sent  two  members  to  Parliament  ? 
or  if  he  were  shown  a  green  park  with  many  signs  of 
flourishing  vegetable  life,  but  none  of  human  habitation, 
and  told  that  that  green  park  sent  two  members  to 
Parliament  ?"  He  then  went  on  to  say  :  "  If  this  stranger 
were  told  all  this  and  was  astonished  at  hearing  it,  how 
much  more  astonished  would  he  not  be  if  he  was  to  see 
large  and  populous  towns,  full  of  enterprise,  and  in- 
dustr)',  and  intelligence,  containing  vast  magazines  and 
every  species  of  manufacture,  and  were  to  be  told  that 
these  did  not  send  any  representatives  to  Parliament .?" 


1 83 1  Lord  John  RusselV  s  speech.  53 

Lord  John  Russell  therefore  proposed  to  deal  with  three 
chief  grievances  ;  first,  the  nomination  of  members  by 
individuals  ;  second,  the  election  by  close  corporations  ; 
and  third,  the  expense  of  elections.  He  proposed  to  de- 
prive certain  extinct  and  nominal  boroughs  of  the  fran- 
chise altogether.  Every  borough  which  in  1821  had  less 
than  2,000  inhabitants  should  lose  altogether  the  right  of 
sending  a  member  to  Parliament.  No  borough  which 
had  not  more  than  4,000  inhabitants  should  send  more 
than  one  member  to  Parliament.  By  this  means  the 
number  of  the  members  would  be  reduced  by  168. 
Then  came  the  question  as  to  the  reorganization  and 
extension  of  the  franchise.  Lord  John  Russell  proceeded 
to  get  rid  of  various  complicated  franchises,  such  as  the 
franchise  for  householders  paying  scot  and  lot,  burgesses, 
capital  burgesses,  burgage  holders,  freeholders,  freeman, 
pot  wallopers,  and  various  other  devices.  He  proposed 
to  simplify  the  franchise  and  make  it  homogeneous  in 
principle.  A  vote  was  to  be  given  to  each  householder 
in  boroughs  paying  rates  for  houses  of  the  yearly  value 
of  10/.  and  upwards.  Resident  voters,  under  the  old 
qualification,  were,  however,  to  be  allowed  to  retain  their 
right  during  life,  but  the  qualification  would  expire 
gradually  with  the  voters.  In  counties  copyholders  to 
the  value  of  10/.  a  year,  qualified  to  serve  on  juries,  were 
to  have  the  vote.  Leaseholders  for  not  less  than  twenty- 
one  years,  whose  annual  rent  was  not  less  than  50/.,  were 
to  enjoy  the  privilege  also.  The  Government  did  not 
propose  to  fill  up  the  whole  of  the  168  vacancies,  as  they 
believed  that  the  House  was  already  too  large  in  its 
numbers.  It  was  proposed  that  seven  large  towns 
should  send  two  members  each,  and  twenty  other  towns 
one  member  each.  The  seven  towns  to  send  two  mem- 
bers   were     Manchester    (with    Salford),    Birmingham, 


54  Introduction  of  the  Reform  Bill. 

Leeds,  Greenwich,  Wolverhampton,  Sheffield,  and 
Sunderland.  The  Metropolis,  according  to  Lord  John 
Russell's  plan,  was  to  have  eight  additional  members, 
two  to  each  of  the  following  boroughs  :  Tower  Hamlets, 
Holborn,  Finsbury,  and  Lambeth.  Each  of  the  three 
Ridings  of  Yorkshire  was  to  have  two  members,  and 
twenty-six  counties,  in  each  of  which  the  inhabitants  ex- 
ceeded 1 50,000,  were  to  have  two  additional  members. 
In  order  to  meet  the  enonnous  expense  of  elections  it  was 
proposed  that  the  poll  should  be  taken  in  separate  dis- 
tricts, so  that  no  voter  should  have  to  travel  more  than 
fifteen  miles  to  give  his  vote.  In  Scotland  the  suf- 
frage was  to  be  given  to  every  copyholder  to  the  annual 
value  of  10/.,  and  to  the  holders  of  leases  of  ten  years 
paying  50/.  rent.  Several  towns  wsre  to  have  an  in- 
crease in  their  representation,  and  thirteen  districts 
composed  of  district  boroughs,  united  for  the  purpose 
of  representation,  were  to  return  one  member  each.  In 
Ireland  the  right  of  voting  was  to  be  given  to  all  holders 
of  houses  or  land  to  the  value  of  10/.  a  year.  Belfast, 
Limerick,  and  Waterford  were  to  have  representation. 
The  number  of  persons  who  were  to  be  entitled  to  vote 
under  this  Bill  and  who  had  no  previous  franchise  were 
to  be,  in  the  counties  about  1 10,000,  in  the  provincial 
towns,  50,000,  in  London  95,000,  in  Scotland  50,000,  in 
Ireland  about  40,000;  in  all,  half  a  million  of  persons 
were  to  be  added  to  the  constituency  of  the  House  of 
Commons. 

The  opposition  to  the  proposals  of  the  Government 
began  at  once.  It  is  not  usual  in  Parliament  to  debate 
much  on  the  mere  request  of  a  Minister  for  leave  to 
bring  in  a  Bill,  but  on  this  occasion  no  one  cared  much 
to  stick  closely  to  precedent.  Lord  John  Russell's  mo- 
tion was  opposed  by  Sir  Robert  Harry  Inglis,  member 


1831  The  Opposition  to  the  Bill.  55 

for  the  University  of  Oxford,  a  man  whose  curious  par- 
iiamentar)'  career  is  remembered  even  in  our  own  time. 
He  was  an  intelligent  man,  a  man  of  education,  of  strict 
political  integrity  and  honour,  but  he  was  opposed  to  any 
kind  of  reform  which  took  the  direction  of  popular  suf- 
frage. He  was  opposed,  indeed,  to  any  change  whatever 
in  the  existing  institutions  of  the  country.  We  have 
hardly  any  public  man  now  who  represents  the  kind  of 
political  superstition  which  was  illustrated  in  tlie  honest 
creed  of  Sir  Robert  Inglis.  Change  of  all  kind  was  to 
him  odious,  nor  could  he  see  any  wisdom  in  accepting 
even  an  inevitable  change.  He  insisted  that  reform 
was  only  revolution.  He  insisted  that  Lord  John  Rus- 
sell's Bill  would  destroy  all  the  natural  influence  of 
education,  rank,  and  property.  He  went  still  farther. 
He  argued  gravely  that  no  such  principle  as  that  which 
connects  taxation  and  representation  was  known  to  the 
English  Constitution.  He  denied  that  there  was  any 
idea  whatever  of  the  representative  principle  in  the 
political  system  of  England.  He  insisted  that  no  town 
or  borough  had  ever  been  called  into  parliamentary 
existence  because  it  was  large  and  populous,  or  shut 
out  from  it  because  it  was  small.  The  principle,  he 
said,  on  which  Parliament  was  founded  was  that  the 
Sovereign  should  invite  whomsoever  he  pleased  to  con- 
sult with  him  on  the  affairs  of  the  country.  He  justified 
even  the  purchase  of  boroughs,  and  insisted  that  if  they 
were  not  to  be  bought  the  noblemen  of  the  country  could 
hardly  be  represented  in  Parliament  at  all.  He  defended 
the  small  boroughs,  the  "  close  and  rotten  boroughs,"  as 
they  were  called  in  thQ  course  of  the  debate,  and  con- 
tended but  that  for  them  Parliament  would  lose  some  of 
its  brightest  ornaments.  This  argument,  indeed,  we  have 
heard  repeated  at  a  period  much  nearer  to  our  own  time, 


56  Introduction  of  the  Reform  Bill.  1831 

and  by  a  man  of  very  different  order  of  intelligence  from 
Sir  Robert  Inglis  ;  by  no  less  a  person  than  Mr.  Glad- 
stone himself.  Sir  Robert  Inglis  declared  that  a  torrent 
of  mob  oratory  was  a  curse  to  the  country,  and  was  used 
for  the  purpose  of  influencing  the  lowest  and  the  most 
debasing  passions,  and  by  "  mob  oratory  "  we  may  say 
he  meant  any  kind  of  eloquence  used  for  the  purpose 
of  asserting  popular  rights.  Sir  Charles  Wetherell  was 
another  representative  of  a  political  school  which  can 
hardly  be  said  to  exist  in  our  time.  He  went,  if  possible, 
still  further  than  Sir  Robert  Inglis  in  his  opposition  to 
reform,  but  he  had  not  Sir  Robert  Inglis's  ability,  and  his 
Toryism  was  more  calculated  to  make  the  House  laugh 
than  to  make  opponents  angry. 

Sir  Robert  Peel  opposed  the  introduction  of  the  Bill 
on  grounds  more  plausible  and  with  better  effect.  He 
declared  that  he  cared  not  whether  the  House  was  dis- 
solved or  not,  and  that  he  should  not  consider  himself 
fit  for  the  performance  of  a  single  legislative  duty  if  he 
permitted  such  a  menace  to  influence  him.  He  con- 
demned those  who  had  "excited  the  people  to  a  pitch  of 
frenzy,  and  spurred  their  lazy  indifference  to  an  accumu- 
lation of  revolutionary  clamour."  Common  prudence,  he 
said,  would  have  forborne  introducing  a  measure  of  the 
kind  at  such  a  crisis  in  our  foreign  and  domestic  relations, 
when  causes  of  fresh  excitement  ought  to  have  been 
avoided.  He  insisted  that  "the  inevitable  tendency"  of 
the  Bill  would  be  "to  sever  every  link  of  connection 
between  the  poorer  classes  and  that  class  from  which 
their  representatives  are  usually  chosen."  In  this  one 
argument  we  think  there  was  some  practical  justice. 
The  tendency  of  the  Bill  was  undoubtedly  to  leave  the 
poorer  classes  out  of  the  representation  altogether.  The 
abolition  of  the  various  "  fancy  franchises,"  then  in  exist- 


1831  Peer s  Speech.  57 

ence,  would  remove  the  only  chance  which  the  poorer 
classes  and  the  working  classes  in  particular  had  of  in- 
fluencing the  elections.  Peel's  argument  in  favour  of 
the  close  borough  system  was  based  on  a  principle  that 
we  can  easily  understand.  He  pointed  to  the  number  of 
men  who  had  entered  the  House  for  boroughs  which  the 
present  Bill  would  disfranchise.  Lord  North,  Burke,  Pitt, 
Flood,  Fox,  Plunket,  Canning,  Windham,  Huskisson, 
Brougham,  Romilly,  and  several  others  were  all  first  re- 
turned for  close  boroughs.  When  by  caprice  or  want  of 
money,  or  otherwise,  some  eminent  men  were  deprived 
of  larger  seats  they  were  rescued  by  some  of  the  close 
boroughs,  and  their  valuable  labours  thus  secured  to 
their  country.  Sheridan  defeated  at  Stafford  found 
shelter  at  Ilchester ;  Windham  rejected  by  Norwich  was 
received  at  Higham  Ferrers ;  Lord  Grey  refused  by 
Northumberland  was  accepted  by  Tavistock.  This  was 
the  kind  of  argument  with  which  England  was  made 
familiar  in  later  years.  It  was  an  argument  used  by  Sir 
Robert  Peel's  greatest  pupil,  Mr.  Gladstone,  against  a 
further  disfranchisement  of  small  boroughs.  It  is  plain, 
however,  that  any  such  advantage  attaching  to  the  exist- 
ence of  small  boroughs  is  only  one  casual  benefit  to  be 
measured  against  a  great  many  certain  and  inevitable 
disadvantages.  The  close  boroughs  were  nests  of  cor- 
ruption, where  they  were  not  actually  pocket  boroughs  and 
the  property  of  some  peer  or  landowner.  Neither  the 
system  of  corruption  nor  the  system  of  nomineeship  can 
be  said  to  be  creditable  or  endurable  in  a  civilised  coun- 
try. Against  these  gross  and  monstrous  defects  we  have 
to  set  off  the  single  and  chance  advantage  that  a  close 
borough,  owned  by  an  intelligent  master,  might  sometimes 
be  the  means  of  returning  an  able  man  to  the  House  of 
Commons.     This  is  all  that  can  be  said  in  justification  of 


58  Introduction  of  the  Reform  Bill.  1831 

the  system,  and  it  is  not  much  to  say.  Besides,  it  is  plain 
that  with  the  growth  of  education,  of  independence,  and 
of  public  spirit  the  close  boroughs  would  lose  entirely 
this  preponderating  advantage.  As  large  and  popular 
constituencies  grow  more  enlightened  and  more  inde- 
pendent they  would  show  themselves  not  less  willing  to 
return  distinguished  men  than  the  closest  borough  owned 
by  the  most  liberal  proprietor.  In  our  own  day,  we  see 
that  men  of  talent,  without  family  or  wealth,  have  a  much 
better  chance,  in  the  large  and  populous  boroughs,  than 
they  would  have  in  a  small  close  borough  the  property  of 
a  peer  or  a  landlord.  Where  the  small  borough  was  not 
the  property  of  a  peer  or  a  landlord,  it  had  of  course  no 
advantage ;  for  the  class  of  voters  who  could  be  bought 
by  the  dozen  for  money  and  beer  were  not  likely  to  be 
greatly  impressed  by  the  genius  and  the  claims  of  some 
moneyless  Sheridan  or  too  conscientious  Burke. 

Sir  Robert  Peel's  speech  was  answered  by  Mr.  Stan- 
ley, afterwards  Lord  Derby,  and  answered  very  effectively 
as  to  that  one  point  about  the  small  boroughs.  What- 
ever advantage,  Mr.  Stanley  said,  might  be  derived  from 
that  mode  of  admission  would  be  more  than  counter- 
balanced by  the  disadvantage  that  the  class  of  persons 
thus  introduced,  whatever  their  talents,  would  not  be 
looked  upon  by  the  people  as  representatives  at  all.  The 
debate  was  adjourned  to  Tuesday,  March  8,  and  was  then 
resumed  by  Mr.  O'Connell.  He  gave  the  Bill  his  earnest 
support.  There  were,  he  said,  objections  to  it.  He 
declared  that  he  himself  was  by  conviction  a  Radical 
reformer,  and  that  this  was  not  a  measure  of  Radical 
reform.  "  In  every  practical  mode  universal  suffrage,"  he 
contended,  "  ought  to  be  adopted  as  a  matter  of  right." 
"  The  duration  of  Parliaments  should  be  shortened  to  the 
time  stipulated  in  the  glorious  Revolution  of  1688,  and 


1831  O' Conneir  s  speech.  59 

above  all,  votes  should  be  taken  by  ballot."  It  will  now 
perhaps  strike  many  persons  as  strange  to  find  a  man  of 
Mr.  O'Connell's  country  and  faith  describing  the  Revolu- 
tion which  unseated  James  II.  and  put  William  on  the 
throne  as  the  "glorious  Revolution  of  1688."  But  Mr. 
O'Connell  was  perhaps  the  last,  as  he  was  certainly  the 
greatest,  of  the  Irish  public  men  whose  political  creed 
was  on  the  whole  identical  with  that  of  the  advanced 
English  Liberals.  Another  point  in  Mr.  O'Connell's 
speech  is  worth  noting.  He  contended  that  the  repre- 
sentation of  many  parts  of  the  country  ought  to  be 
largely  reorganized.  He  gave  as  an  instance  the  fact 
that  the  population  of  Dublin  amounted  to  considerably 
more  than  a  fourth  of  the  population  of  London,  and  that 
on  that  ground  Dublin  was  fairly  entitled  to  larger  repre- 
sentation. The  relative  position  of  London  and  Dubhn 
has  marvellously  changed  since  that  time.  Instead  of 
being  considerably  more  than  one-fourth  of  the  popula- 
tion of  London  Dublin  is  indeed  considerably  less  than 
one-eighth.  "When  I  hear  triumphant  assertions  made," 
said  O'Connell,  "as  to  the  working  well  of  the  present 
system,  I  would  refer  you  to  Ireland  for  an  illustration. 
We  have  had  a  complete  trial  of  it  for  thirty  years  at 
least,  and  yet  Ireland  is  one  of  the  most  miserable 
countries  on  the  earth,  with  wretchedness  and  starvation 
spreading  desolation  through  the  land." 

The  debate  went  on  during  seven  nights  until  an  early 
hour  of  the  morning  of  March  10.  Lord  Russell  then 
replied.  The  Speaker  put  the  question,  "That  leave  be 
given  to  bring  in  a  Bill  to  amend  the  representation  of 
the  people  in  England  and  Wales."  The  motion  was 
agreed  to  without  a  division.  The  House  of  Commons 
seldom  divides  on  a  motion  for  the  first  reading  of  any 
measure  introduced  even  by  a  private  member,  not  to  say 


6o  Introduction  of  the  Reform  Bill.  1831 

a  measure  introduced  by  the  Government.  Leave  was 
then  granted  to  introduce  Reform  Bills  for  Scotland  and 
for  Ireland.  It  will  easily  be  seen  that  the  measures  thus 
introduced  must  have  fallen  very  far  short  of  the  wishes 
of  advanced  reformers.  Everyone  who  pretended  to  the 
name  of  a  Radical  reformer  and  who  took  part  in  the 
debate  expressed  a  certain  sense  of  disappointment.  We 
know  that  in  the  Cabinet,  by  which  it  was  introduced, 
there  were  influential  members  who  would  gladly  have 
gone  much  further  than  Lord  Grey  or  even  Lord  John 
Russell  would  have  consented  to  go.  The  feeling  of  the 
country,  therefore,  was  not  one  of  very  great  enthusiasm 
at  first.  Perhaps  if  the  Conservative  leaders  had  been 
crafty,  not  to  say  prudent  men,  and  had  allowed  the  Bill 
to  go  through  its  various  stages  without  serious  opposi- 
tion, the  interest  of  the  country  would  have  diminished 
and  languished,  and  it  might  have  passed  into  law 
without  arousing  any  feeling  whatever.  It  ought  to  have 
been  clear  to  the  Conservative  leaders  that  when  once 
the  Government  of  Lord  Grey  had  proposed  such  a 
scheme  there  could  be  no  quiet  until  that  measure  at 
least  was  carried,  and  that  any  decided  opposition  would 
only  tend  to  inflame  the  passions  and  increase  the 
demands  of  the  people  out  of  doors.  Most  of  the  mode- 
rate reformers  in  the  country  understood  this  perfectly 
well.  They  saw  that  nothing  would  satisfy  the  public, 
even  for  the  present,  short  of  the  full  provisions  of  the 
Bill  as  introduced  by  the  Government.  They  dreaded 
lest,  emboldened  by  the  lack  of  popular  enthusiasm,  the 
Tory  leaders  should  endeavour  to  defeat  the  Bill,  and 
thus  rouse  public  spirit  into  a  passionate  demand  for 
some  stronger  measure.  Therefore  nearly  all  the  leaders 
of  popular  movements  out  of  doors  lent  what  we  may 
call  a  generous  assistance  to  Lord  Grey  and  Lord  John 


1 83 1  The  Feeling  of  the  Country.  61 

Russell.  Their  assistance  was  generous  because  the 
measure  was  not  what  they  would  themselves  have  pro- 
posed, and,  indeed,  in  many  points  fell  short  of  the 
scheme  which  a  few  months  before  they  thought  them- 
selves entitled  to  expect  at  the  hands  of  the  Whig  Go- 
vernment. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  PROGRESS  OF  THE  STRUGGLE. 

On  March  21,  1831,  Lord  John  Russell  moved  the 
second  reading  of  the  Reform  Bill.  An  amendment  was 
moved  to  the  effect  that  it  be  read  a  second  time  that  day 
six  months,  and  a  debate  took  place  which  lasted  two 
nights  and  was  of  a  somewhat  languid  character,  nearly 
all  the  great  speakers  of  the  House  having  already  ex- 
|>ressed  their  opinions  and  fully  argued  the  question 
from  all  points  of  view.  Three  hundred  and  two  mem- 
bers voted  for  the  second  reading,  three  hundred  and  one 
for  the  amendment,  and  the  second  reading  was  therefore 
carried  only  by  a  majority  of  one.  The  Opposition  were 
for  the  time  triumphant.  They  felt  perfectly  certain  that 
a  Bill  which  passed  its  second  reading  by  only  a  majority 
of  one  could  easily  be  so  mutilated  in  Committee  as  to 
render  it  of  little  harm,  even  if  it  should  succeed  in  pass- 
ing through  the  House  of  Lords.  When  the  Bill  was 
about  to  go  into  Committee,  General  Gascoigne  moved 
an  instruction  declaring  that  in  the  opinion  of  the  House, 
"The  total  number  of  knights,  citizens,  and  burgesses 
returned  to  Parliament  for  that  part  of  the  United  King- 
dom called  England  and  Wales  ought  not  to  be  dimin- 
ished." Lord  Althorp  at  once  understood  the  meaning 
of  this  attempt.     It  was  the  first  of  a  series  of  motions  by 


62  The  Progress  of  the  Struggle.  '831 

which  the  Opposition  intended  to  interfere  with  the  pro- 
gress of  the  Committee  in  a  manner  which,  as  he  said,  if 
submitted  to  would  be  fatal  to  the  Bill,  or  at  least  so  det- 
rimental to  it  as  to  render  it  valueless.  When  the  House 
divided  there  were  299  votes  for  General  Gascoigne's 
motion  and  291  against  it. 

The  majority  against  Government  was  therefore  eight. 
The  Ministers  made  up  their  mind  to  appeal  to  the 
country.  The  King,  it  appeared,  was  strongly  opposed 
to  a  dissolution,  and  had  intimated  to  his  Ministers  when 
they  first  came  into  office  that  he  did  not  feel  inclined  to 
dissolve  a  Parliament  so  newly  elected  in  order  to  enable 
them  to  carry  a  Reform  Bill.  Now,  however,  the  Minis- 
ters were  determined  that  Parliament  should  be  pro- 
rogued at  once  with  a  view  to  its  speedy  dissolution. 
There  was  a  great  deal  of  trouble  to  induce  the  King  to 
consent  to  this  arrangement.  On  Lord  Brougham  fell 
the  disagreeable  task  of  announcing  to  William  the 
advice  of  the  Ministry.  Something  like  a  scene  is  said 
to  have  taken  place.  The  King  made  all  sorts  of  tech- 
nical objections  to  the  dissolution  of  Parliament,  and 
even,  it  is  said,  went  to  the  point  of  accusing  Lord  Grey 
and  Lord  Brougham  of  something  like  high  treason  in 
having  made  arrangements  to  call  out  the  Life  Guards 
for  the  closing  ceremony  of  prorogation.  At  last,  how- 
ever, William  was  prevailed  upon,  and  the  dissolution 
took  place.  Sir  Robert  Peel  was  actually  speaking,  de 
nouncing  the  Ministry  with  a  vehemence  such  as  he 
hardly  ever  showed  before  or  after  in  the  whole  course  of 
his  career,  when  the  knock  of  "  Black  Rod  "  was  heard 
to  summon  the  Commons  to  attend  at  the  bar  of  the 
Peers  and  hear  the  prorogation  announced. 

The  dissolution  of  the  Parliament  was  celebrated  by 
reformers  all  over  the  country  with  the  utmost  enthu- 


1 83 1  Parliament  Dissolved.  63 

siasm.  There  were  illuminations  in  London  and  in  most 
of  the  great  towns.  At  the  West-end  of  London  some 
of  the  anti-reformers  who  refused  to  put  lights  in  their 
windows  had  their  houses  attacked  and  the  windows 
broken.  The  Duke  of  Wellington  was  one  of  those  who 
became  in  this  way  the  victim  of  a  popular  demonstra- 
tion. The  windows  of  Apsley  House  which  look  into 
Hyde  Park  were  broken.  The  shutters  on  that  side  of 
the  house  were  kept  closed  for  years  and  years  after,  and 
popular  rumour  had  it  that  the  Duke  of  Wellington 
refused  to  allow  the  windows  ever  again  to  be  opened 
which  the  anger  of  the  public  had  thus  vehemently 
assailed.  When  the  elections  came  on  vast  sums  of 
money  were  spent  on  both  sides.  It  is  to  be  feared  that 
bribery  and  corruption  were  almost  as  active  and  as 
flourishing  on  the  one  side  as  on  the  other.  In  nearly 
all  the  great  towns  the  result  of  the  election  was  in  favour 
of  reform.  General  Gascoigne,  one  of  the  members  for 
Liverpool,  the  man  whose  "  instructions  "  to  the  Com- 
mittee had  been  the  first  cause  of  the  dissolution,  found 
himself  driven  out  of  his  seat  by  an  overwhelming 
majority.  Nearly  all  the  English  county  members  were 
now  pledged  to  reform.  The  transformation  effected  by 
the  elections  was  as  great  as  any  ever  witnessed  even  in 
our  own  days,  when  complete  changes  of  power  are 
familiar  to  us  as  the  result  of  an  appeal  to  the  country. 

In  the  new  Parliament  Lord  John  Russell  and  Mr. 
Stanley  appeared  as  Cabinet  Ministers.  On  June  21  the 
King  opened  Parliament.  As  he  went  down  to  the 
House  of  Lords  he  was  received  with  immense  enthu- 
siasm both  without  and  within  the  walls  of  Westminster 
Palace.  On  June  24  Lord  John  Russell  introduced  a 
second  Bill  on  the  subject  of  Parliamentary  Reform. 
Except  for  some  slight  alterations  in  detail  the  new  Re- 


64  The  Progress  of  the  Struggle.  1831 

form  Bill  was  practically  the  same  as  the  old.  The 
second  reading  was  brought  forward  on  July  4,  and  the 
debate  occupied  three  nights.  Three  hundred  and  sixty- 
seven  votes  were  given  for  the  second  reading  and  two 
hundred  and  thirty-one  against  it,  thus  showing  a  ma- 
jority of  one  hundred  and  thirty-six  in  favour  of  the 
Government.  The  Opposition  now  made  up  their  mind 
to  try  what  they  could  do  by  a  process  more  familiar  to 
our  days  than  to  theirs,  the  device  of  Parliamentary  ob- 
struction. Repeated  motions  for  adjournment  were  made, 
on  each  of  which  a  discussion  and  a  division  took  place. 
There  was  something  ingenious  in  the  device  by  which 
the  debate  was  kept  up  through  the  whole  of  the  night. 
For  example,  some  member  of  the  Opposition  would 
move  "that  the  Speaker  do  now  leave  the  Chair."  On 
the  motion  being  lost  it  would  be  moved  "  that  the  debate 
be  now  adjourned."  That  motion  being  lost,  somebody 
would  again  move  that  the  Speaker  do  leave  the  Chair, 
and  so  with  alternations  of  motions  for  the  Speaker  to 
leave  the  Chair,  and  for  the  House  now  to  adjourn,  the 
whole  night  was  passed  through,  and  it  was  half-past 
seven  in  the  morning  when  exhausted  members  were 
allowed  to  go  home,  only  to  assemble  again  at  three 
o'clock  that  day.  Scenes  of  this  kind  were  repeated 
again  and  again.  Week  after  week  passed  on  while  de- 
termined Conservatives  were  talking  against  time,  and 
were  making  use  of  the  forms  of  the  House  with  every 
possible  ingenuity  in  order  to  delay  the  passing  of  the 
Bill.  The  same  speeches  in  almost  the  same  words  were 
made  over  and  over  again,  on  every  point  concerning 
which  a  discussion  could  possibly  be  raised.  Reformers 
both  in  and  out  of  Parliament  began  to  be  seriously 
alarmed.  It  seemed  not  impossible  that,  if  tactics  of  this 
kind  were  pursued,  the  Government  might  find  it  out  of 


1 83 1  Parliamentary  Obstruction.  65 

their  power  to  carry  through  the  Bill  in  any  time  during 
which  Parliament  could  be  expected  to  sit.  The  disfran- 
chising clauses  of  the  Bill  gave  immense  opportunity  for 
debate.  As  each  rotten  borough  proposed  for  sacrifice 
came  under  consideration,  opportunity  was  taken  not 
only  for  defending  the  existence  of  that  particular  place, 
but  for  repeating  all  over  again  the  arguments  against 
any  manner  of  reform,  with  which  the  ears  of  the  House 
had  been  wearily  familiar  for  months. 

Time  and  the  hour,  however,  run  through  the  roughest 
day.  The  extinguishing  of  the  condemned  boroughs 
was  accomplished  at  last.  The  struggle  then  began  over 
the  boroughs  which  were  to  be  reduced  from  two  mem- 
bers to  one.  The  work  of  obstruction  set  in  again.  It  was 
arranged  and  drilled  by  a  systematiscd  process  of  organ- 
isation. "  There  was,"  says  Mr.  Molesworth  in  his  "  His- 
tory of  the  Reform  Bill,"  "  a  regular  division  of  labor 
in  the  work  of  obstruction,  which  was  arranged  and 
superintended  by  a  committee,  of  which  Sir  R.  Peel  was 
the  President."  "In  order  to  promote  delay,"  says  the 
same  author,  "the  leaders  of  the  Opposition  stood  up 
again,  and  again  repeated  the  same  stale  statements  and 
arguments,  and  often  in  almost  the  same  words."  Be- 
tween July  12  and  27,  Sir  R.  Peel  spoke  forty-eight 
times,  Mr.  Wilson  Croker  fifty-seven  times.  Sir  C.  Weth- 
erell  fifty-eight  times.  At  last,  however,  on  August  2, 
the  disfranchising  clauses  were  finally  disposed  of,  and 
the  house  then  went  on  to  consider  the  third  clause, 
which  gave  two  members  each  to  large  towns  previously 
unrepresented.  A  night  was  spent  in  resisting  the  claim 
of  Manchester,  Birmingham,  and  Leeds  to  have  repre- 
sentatives in  the  House  of  Commons.  Meanwhile, 
meetings  were  being  held  in  London  and  throughout  the 
country,  urging  on  the  Governinent  not  to  give  way,  to 
P 


66  The  Progress  of  the  Struggle. 

fight  against  the  obstruction  to  the  very  last,  and  to  keep 
Parliament  sitting  as  long  as  might  be  necessary  for  the 
purpose  of  carrying  the  Bill.  An  important  meeting  of 
the  supporters  of  the  Government  was  held  at  the  Foreign 
Office,  over  which  Lord  Althorp  himself  presided,  and  at 
that  meeting  he  declared  that  "the  enemies  of  reform 
are  miserably  mistaken  if  they  hope  to  defeat  the  Bill  by 
delay."  "  Rather  than  abandon  the  Bill,"  he  declared, 
"  Parliament  will  be  kept  sitting  till  next  December,  or 
next  December  twelve  months  if  necessary." 

August  1 8  was  a  somewhat  memorable  day.  The 
Marquis  of  Chandos  moved  an  amendment  on  the  i6th 
clause,  with  the  object  of  giving  a  vote  to  any  farmer 
occupying  on  his  own  account  land  at  the  rent  of  not  less 
than  50/.  per  annum,  without  any  reference  to  the  condi- 
tion of  his  tenure.  Lord  Althorp  opposed  the  amend- 
ment, on  the  ground  that  tenants  at  will,  upon  whom 
Lord  Chandos  proposed  to  confer  the  franchise,  were 
for  the  most  part  completely  dependent  upon  their 
landlords.  A  considerable  number,  however,  of  the  re- 
formers themselves  took  a  different  view,  and  supported 
the  amendment  on  the  ground  that  to  enlarge  as  much 
as  possible  the  principle  of  enfranchisement  was  the  ob- 
ject they  had  mainly  at  heart.  The  amendment  was 
carried  by  a  majority  of  eighty-one.  The  Bill  passed 
through  committee  on  September  7.  The  report  was 
taken  on  Tuesday,  13th,  and  its  consideration  occupied 
several  evenings.  On  September  19  the  Bill  was  read  a 
third  time.  One  hundred  and  thirteen  voted  for  the 
third  reading,  and  fifty-eight  against.  The  majority  was 
fifty-five.  The  numbers  on  both  sides  were  small,  be- 
cause the  House  did  not  expect  a  division  so  soon.  The 
anti-reformers  took  it  for  granted  that  there  would  be  a 
long  debate,  but  as  it  happened  very  few  of  them  were 


1 83 1  The  Bill  and  the  Lords,  6  7 

in  their  seats  when  the  third  reading  was  proposed. 
Every  captain  of  the  Opposition  apparently  expected 
that  somebody  else  would  be  ready  to  begin  the  discus- 
sion. Only  one  chief  of  their  band,  Sir  J.  Scarlett,  hap- 
pened to  be  in  his  place,  and  he  endeavoured  to  talk 
against  time,  but  was  frightened  out  of  his  design  by  the 
vehement  shouts  of  "  divide."  He  gave  way  at  last,  and 
the  division  was  taken,  to  the  surprise  of  crowds  of  Tories 
who  came  rushing  up  to  prolong  the  discussion,  and  ar- 
rived only  in  time  to  find  themselves  too  late. 

The  motion  that  "  the  Bill  do  now  pass,"  gave  them, 
however,  an  opportunity  for  a  discussion  of  three  even- 
ings more.  At  five  o'clock  on  the  morning  of  September 
22,  the  last  division  took  place.  Three  hundred  and 
forty-five  members  voted  for  the  passing  of  the  Bill,  239 
against  it,  showing  a  majority  of  106  on  the  side  of  the 
Government.  The  Bill,  however,  had  still  to  go  before 
the  House  of  Lords.  It  was  brought  up  on  the  evening 
of  the  22nd  to  that  House.  Lord  Grey  moved  its  first 
reading.  No  discussion  took  place,  and  on  October  3, 
Lord  Grey  moved  that  the  Bill  be  read  a  second  time. 
His  speech  appears  on  the  testimony  of  all  contempora- 
ries to  have  been  fully  worthy  of  the  great  occasion.  It 
was  closely  argumentative  in  substance,  stately  and  elo- 
quont  in  style.  Especially  impressive  was  the  con- 
cluding portion,  in  which  he  appealed  to  the  archbishops 
and  bishops  in  the  House  not  to  assist  a  narrow  majority 
in  rejecting  the  Bill.  He  appealed  to  them  to  remember 
that  if  their  influence  should  enable  the  opponents  of 
reform  to  throw  out  the  Government  proposition,  the 
prelates  would  then  stand  before  the  people  of  England 
as  the  enemies  of  a  moderate  and  just  scheme  of  reform. 
Lord  Wharncliffe  moved  that  the  Bill  be  read  a  second 
time  that  day  six  months.    The  Duke  of  Wellington  and 


68  The  Progress  of  the  Struggle. 

Lord  Lyndhurst  opposed  the  Bill ;  Lord  Brougham  sup- 
ported it,  with  characteristic  energy  and  power.  The 
division  took  place  on  the  morning  of  October  8,  and 
there  was  found  to  be  a  majority  of  forty -one  against  the 
second  reading.  The  whole  work  of  a  session  in  the 
Commons  had  been  done  in  vain.  The  Lords  interposed 
at  the  last  moment,  and  there  was  an  end  of  reform  for 
that  year. 

Some,  at  least,  of  the  peers  must  have  felt  the  respon- 
sibility of  the  situation  very  deeply,  and  must  have 
found  their  hearts  sink  within  them  as  they  left  the 
House  of  Lords  on  the  dawn  of  that  morning  in  autumn, 
and  were  able  to  say  to  themselves  that  they  had  inter- 
posed between  the  English  people  and  a  moderate  and 
yet  popular  scheme  of  reform.  Passionate  emotion 
spread  over  the  country  when  the  news  went  abroad. 
Tumultuous  meetings  were  held  everywhere.  In  many 
towns  the  shops  were  closed,  and  nwurning  bells  tolled 
from  the  churches.  "  Run  for  gold,"  became  the  popu- 
lar cry,  and  a  run  was  really  made  upon  the  Bank  of 
England  which  at  one  time  caused  great  alarm.  Vast 
crowds  assembled  along  the  street  from  Whitehall  to  the 
Houses  of  Parliament,  cheering  the  reform  leaders,  and 
denouncing  with  furious  execrations  the  members  of 
either  House  who  had  opposed  the  Bill.  The  Duke  of 
Newcastle,  the  Marquis  of  Londonderry,  and  several 
other  peers  were  attacked  by  mobs,  and  were  saved  not 
without  some  struggle  and  some  danger.  The  bishops 
were  the  objects  of  special  detestation,  and  a  cry  arose 
everywhere  for  their  expulsion  from  the  Upper  Chamber. 
Indeed,  proposals  for  the  abolition  of  the  House  of  Lords 
became  popular  almost  everywhere  over  the  country. 
Riots  took  place  at  Derby  and  at  Nottingham.  Notting- 
ham Castle,  the  seat  of  the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  who  had 


1 83 1  The  Reform  Riots.  69 

made  himself  specially  odious  as  an  opponent  of  the 
Reform  Bill,  was  burnt  to  the  ground.  One  of  the 
innocent  victims  of  the  time  was  Mrs.  Musters,  once 
celebrated  as  Mary  Chaworth,  Lord  Byron's  first  love, 
about  whom  he  had  written  his  poem  "  The  Dream." 
The  house  of  Mr.  Musters  was  set  on  fire.  The  fire  was 
not  allowed  to  spread,  and  indeed  was  put  out  without 
much  trouble,  but  Mrs.  Musters  in  alarm  fled  from  the 
house,  and  took  refuge  in  a  garden.  Terror  and  the 
chill  air  brought  on  a  fit  of  illness,  which  ended  shortly 
after  in  her  death.  Belvoir  Castle,  the  seat  of  the  Duke 
of  Rutland,  was  attacked  by  a  mob.  Bristol  saw  a  series 
of  riots,  the  like  of  which  had  hardly  ever  been  witnessed 
in  this  country  before.  Sir  Charles  Wetherell,  one  of 
the  most  notorious  opponents  of  the  Reform  Bill,  was 
Recorder  of  Bristol,  and  came  down  to  hold  an  assize 
court  there.  When  he  entered  the  city,  the  carriage 
in  which  he  sat  was  escorted  by  a  large  number  of 
special  constables,  but  it  was  attacked  by  a  crowd. 
Stones  were  thrown,  several  of  the  attendants  were 
severely  injured,  and  it  was  with  no  little  difficulty  that 
Sir  Charles  was  enabled  to  make  his  way  into  the  hall 
where  the  court  was  to  be  held.  A  series  of  riots  began. 
The  rioters  for  a  time  gained  the  upper  hand,  and  Sir 
Charles  Wetherell  had  to  escape  from  the  Mansion 
House  in  disguise ;  had  to  climb  over  the  roofs  of  the 
houses  near,  and  had  to  be  smuggled  out  of  the  city  as 
quickly  as  possible.  The  troops  were  at  last  called  out, 
the  officers  and  men  behaved  with  great  forbearance  and 
discretion,  and  the  riot  was  at  last  suppressed,  but  not 
before  the  Mansion  House,  the  Bridewell,  and  some 
other  public  buildings  had  been  thoroughly  destroyed. 
In  almost  every  cathedral  town  there  was  what  might  be 
called  a  special  disturbance.     The  unpopularity  of  the 


70  The  Progress  of  the  Struggle.  1 831 

bishops  was  broad  and  deep,  and  many  of  the  fiercer 
spirits  in  every  mob  took  the  opportunity  to  urge  an 
attack  upon  cathedrals  and  churches.  Even  the  reform 
Government  themselves  came  in  for  a  certain  share  of 
the  fury  against  anti-reformers.  Some  wild  suspicion 
got  about  that  there  were  divisions  in  the  Cabinet  as  to 
the  expediency  of  pressing  the  Reform  Bill,  and  it  was 
feared  that  Lord  Grey  might  be  induced  to  put  off  the 
reintroduction  of  the  measure  to  some  indefinite  time. 
Lord  Grey  felt  a  little  hurt  at  these  suspicions,  and  on 
one  or  two  occasions  rebuked  a  public  deputation  with 
something  like  asperity.  The  whole  condition  of  things 
was  such  that  a  very  slight  act  of  indiscretion,  or  even  a 
very  slight  excess  of  zeal  at  an  inopportune  moment, 
among  the  leaders  on  one  side  or  the  other,  might  have 
led  to  something  like  a  distinctly  revolutionary  move- 
ment. 

How  near  England  came  at  this  time  to  the  verge  of 
actual  revolution,  will  probably  be  never  known  with 
certainty.  It  is  easy  now,  as  we  look  back  from  a  safe 
distance,  to  underrate  the  extent  of  the  danger.  We  have 
grown  so  accustomed  to  stability  in  our  political  affairs, 
that  it  seems  hard  to  believe  in  the  imminence  of  revolu- 
tion at  a  time  so  near  to  our  own.  Yet  it  is  hardly  pos- 
sible to  doubt  that  during  the  reform  struggle,  England 
was  brought  once  or  twice  very  close  to  revolution,  and 
that  the  great  leaders  of  the  liberal  party  of  the  day  were 
aware  of  the  danger,  and  were  making  preparations 
against  it.  Some  of  the  Liberal  leaders  must  have  begun 
to  be  afraid  lest  the  King  should  ultimately  resist  the 
pressure  of  the  Ministry  and  of  the  public.  They  must 
have  asked  themselves  what  course  it  would  be  their  duty 
to  take  in  such  an  emergency.  If  the  King  persisted  in 
opposing   the   operation   of    constitutional   principles,  it 


1 83 1  Possible  Reiwlution.  71 

would  be  practically  to  attempt  a  revolution.     Were  the 
great  Liberal  nobles  of  England  to  side  with  the  King 
against  the  Parliament  and  the  people,  or  to  endeavour 
to  take  such  action  on  behalf  of  the  Parliament  and  the 
people   as   might   anticipate  the  unconstitutional  action 
of  the  Crown  ?    The  dilemma  appeared  not  unlike  that 
which  was  presented  when  Charles  I.  broke  away  from 
his  Parliament.     Some  at  least  of  the  influential  English 
nobles  seem  to  have  been  inclined  to  cast  in  their  lot 
with  the  Parliament  and  against  the  Sovereign  in  the 
event  of  the  Sovereign  proving  faithless  to  the  constitu- 
tional principles  by  virtue  of  which  alone  he  held  his 
crown.     Many  years  afterwards  it  came  out  that  there 
was  a  tentative  sort  of  correspondence  going  on  under 
the  sanction,  or  at  least  with  the  connivance,  of  some  of 
the  Liberal  leaders,  the  object  of  which  was   to   make 
arrangements  for  the  disposition  of  the  army  in  the  event 
of  the  King's  unconstitutional  action  rendering  a  struggle 
inevitable.     During  the  trial  of  the  Irish  state  prisoners 
at  Clonmel  in   1848  evidence  was  called  to  prove  the 
existence  of  a  correspondence  which  undoubtedly  showed 
that  some  influential  reformers   were   prepared,  should 
the   necessity  be   forced  upon   them,   to   side  with  the 
Parliament  and  the  people  against  the  King,  and  that 
they  were  trying  to  secure  in  advance  the  co-operation 
•  of  the  great   soldier,    Sir   Charles   Napier.     Meanwhile 
popular  excitement  everywhere  was  growing  to  the  wild- 
est pitch.     O'ConncU,  the  Irish  leader,  threw  all  the  aid 
of  his  eloquence  and  his  energy  into  the  cause  of  English 
Reform.     He  once  addressed  a  great  meeting  at  Charing 
Cross,  and  pointing  with  his  outstretched  right  hand  in 
the   direction    of  Whitehall    Palace,   he   reminded    his 
audience   that   there  a  King  had   lost  his  head.     Why, 
O'Connell    asked,  had   this  doom  come  on  him  ?    The 


72  The  Progress  of  the  Struggle.  1831 

orator  supplied  the  answer  himself.  "  It  was,"  said 
O'Connell,  "  because  he  obeyed  the  dictation  of  a  foreign 
wife."  The  allusion  to  the  supposed  influence  of  the 
Queen  over  King  William  was  taken  up  by  the  crowd 
with  instant  appreciation,  and  was  cheered  with  a  ve- 
hemence which  gave  new  emphasis  to  its  political 
meaning. 

Parliament  reassembled  on  December  6,  1831.  The 
King  in  person  opened  the  session.  His  speech  an- 
nounced that  measures  for  the  reform  of  the  Commons 
would  be  introduced,  and  added  that  "  the  speedy  and 
satisfactory  settlement  of  this  question  becomes  daily  of 
more  pressing  importance  to  the  security  of  the  State  and 
the  contentment  and  the  welfare  of  the  people."  On 
Monday,  December  12,  Lord  John  Russell  rose  in  the 
House  of  Commons  to  ask  leave  to  bring  in  his  third 
Reform  Bill.  There  were  no  very  important  differences 
between  the  new  Bill  and  the  former  measures.  Some 
slight  changes,  of  little  account  to  us  at  this  distance  of 
time,  were  introduced,  and  these  on  the  whole  were  rather 
of  a  nature  to  moderate  than  to  strengthen  the  character 
of  the  Bill.  The  Opposition  struggled  hard  to  have  the 
second  reading  delayed,  and  made  it  a  reproach  to 
Ministers  that  whatever  changes  they  had  introduced 
into  their  measures  had  been  borrowed  from  the  Con- 
servative side  of  the  House.  The  second  reading  of  the 
Bill  was  taken  on  December  18,  a  Sunday  morning. 
There  were  324  votes  for  the  second  reading,  162  against 
it;  a  majority  of  exactly  2  to  i.  Parliament  adjourned 
for  the  Christmas  holidays.  Much  of  the  early  part  of 
the  New  Year  was  occupied  in  trying  the  rioters  who  had 
made  disturbances  throughout  the  country.  They  were 
severely  dealt  with  in  some  cases.  Four  men  were 
executed  at  Bristol,  three  at  Nottingham.      Parliament 


1832  The  Waverers.  73 

reassembled  on  January  17,  1832  ;  on  the  20th  the  House 
went  into  committee  on  the  Reform  Bill.  The  tactics  of 
obstruction  came  promptly  into  play  again.  From 
January  20  to  March  14,  was  occupied  in  this  sort  of 
opposition.  The  Bill  got  out  of  committee  then,  and 
passed  its  third  reading  on  March  23,  by  a  majority  of 
1 16.  It  was  introduced  into  the  House  of  Lords  at  once, 
and  its  second  reading  fixed  for  April  9. 

The  great  question  now  was  whether  the  Lords  would 
give  way.  A  small  group  of  peers,  led  by  Lord  Wharn- 
cliffe  and  Lord  Harrowby,  came  into  considerable  promi- 
nence at  this  crisis.  They  were  called  "  the  Waverers," 
because  their  political  action  oscillated  backwards  and 
forwards  between  the  Ministry  and  the  Opposition.  They 
really  held  the  balance  of  power  in  the  House  of  Lords. 
The  course  that  they  might  decide  upon  at  any  moment 
would  settle  for  the  time  the  fate  of  the  Reform  Bill. 
Lord  Wharncliffe  went  so  far  as  to  admit  that  some 
sort  of  reform  measure  must  be  introduced,  but  he  voted 
against  the  second  reading  of  the  former  Bill  because  he 
declared  he  had  still  a  hope  that  something  more  moder- 
ate might  be  introduced.  The  key  of  the  difficulty, 
however,  was  held  in  the  hands  of  the  King.  If  he  would 
merely  give  his  consent  to  a  large  creation  of  new  peers. 
Lord  Wharncliflfe  and  his  waverers  would  most  certainly 
never  put  the  Government  to  the  trouble  of  carrying  such 
a  measure  into  effect.  They  would  never  run  the  risk  of 
having  their  House  flooded  with  reforming  peers.  But 
this  was  exactly  what  the  King  was  unwilling  to  do.  He 
hoped  that  the  Waverers  would  assist  him  in  his  desire 
to  get  a  very  moderate,  and  from  his  point  of  view,  a  very 
harmless  Reform  Bill  introduced.  So  long  as  there  was 
any  hope  of  thus  tampering  with  the  constitution,  he  was 
determined  not  to  give  way  to  the  urgent  demands  of  the 


74  The  Progress  of  the  Struggle. 

Ministry.  He  would  not  authorise  them  to  threaten  a 
new  creation  of  peers.  When  the  Bill  was  brought  into 
the  House  of  Lords  on  April  9,  the  Duke  of  Wellington 
announced  that  he  was  as  determined  as  ever  to  offer 
it  an  uncompromising  opposition.  He  was  indiscreet 
enough  in  his  speech  to  declare  that  he  did  not  believe 
the  King  himself  wished  for  any  such  reform  as  the  Bill 
proposed.  He  said  he  was  fully  persuaded  that  it  was  a 
mistake  to  believe  that  the  King  had  any  interest  in  that 
Bill,  and  was  satisfied  that  if  the  King's  real  feelings 
were  made  known  to  the  country,  Lord  Grey  would  never 
be  able  to  pass  such  a  measure.  The  Waverers,  however, 
supported  the  second  reading  of  the  Bill,  and  it  was 
carried  by  a  majority  of  nine.  The  policy  of  the  Waverers 
seemed  still  to  be  carried  out  in  the  spirit  and  almost  in  the 
letter.  They  had  helped  the  Minister  to  pass  the  second 
reading,  but  by  a  majority  so  small  as  almost  to  allow  the 
Opposition  to  feel  fully  confident  that  they  could  so  muti- 
late it  in  committee  as  to  render  it  practically  worthless. 
When  the  House  went  into  committee.  Lord  Lyndhurst 
led  the  Opposition,  and  moved  that  the  consideration  of 
the  disenfranchising  clauses  should  be  postponed  until 
the  enfranchising  clause  had  first  been  considered,  so 
that  instead  of  making  enfranchisement  a  consequence  of 
disenfranchisement,  disenfranchisement  might  follow  en- 
franchisement. The  Waverers  declared  that  they  would 
go  with  Lord  Lyndhurst.  It  may  seem  that  the  question 
was  of  little  importance,  and  only  concerned  the  order 
in  which  the  various  clauses  of  the  Bill  were  to  be  taken 
by  the  committee,  but  Lord  Grey  now,  as  on  a  former 
occasion,  promptly  declared  that  the  real  question  for 
him  was  whether  the  control  of  the  measure  was  to  be 
left  in  the  hands  of  its  friends  and  its  promoters,  or 
whether  it  was  to  pass  into  the  power  and  guidance  of 
those  who  were  always  its  bitter   and   deadly  enemies. 


183  a  Lord  Grey^  s  Resignation.  75 

He  declared  that  if  Lord  Lyndhurst's  motion  were  car- 
ried, he  would  regard  it  as  fatal  to  the  Bill.  Lord  Lynd- 
hurst  persevered,  and  his  motion  was  carried  by  a  ma- 
jority of  thirty-five.  Lord  Grey  at  once  moved  the  ad- 
journment of  the  debate  and  the  further  consideration  of" 
the  Bill  until  May  10.  It  was  now  clear  that  Lord  Grey 
was  determined  to  carry  the  measure  by  the  assistance 
of  the  King,  or  to  resign  his  office.  The  King  at  first 
refused  to  give  his  consent  to  the  creation  of  a  sufficient 
number  of  peers  to  insure  the  passing  of  the  measure. 
Lord  Grey  tendered  his  resignation,  and  the  resignation 
was  accepted. 
1^  '  The  wild  commotion  that  spread  all  over  the  country 
alarmed  for  a  while  even  the  stoutest  opponents  of  re- 
form. The  Duke  of  WeUington  himself  may  have  felt 
his  heart  sink  within  him.  Utter  commotion  prevailed 
in  the  palace.  The  King  sent  for  Lord  Lyndhurst  and 
begged  for  his  advice.  Lord  Lyndhurst  recommended 
that  the  Duke  of  Wellington  should  be  sent  for.  The 
King  endeavoured  to  prevail  on  the  Duke  to  take  the 
leadership  of  a  new  administration.  The  Duke  did  not 
see  his  way,  and  recommended  that  Peel  should  be  in- 
vited to  form  a  Government.  Peel  knew  well  that  he 
could  not  maintain  a  Ministry',  and  he  naturally  and  pro- 
perly declined.  The  Duke  of  Wellington  was  once  more 
urged,  and,  out  of  sheer  loyalty  and  devotion  to  his 
Sovereign,  he  actually  made  the  vain  attempt  to  get  to- 
gether an  anti-reform  administration.  It  was  only  an 
attempt.  It  came  to  nothing.  Before  the  game  was 
fairly  started  it  had  to  be  given  up.  Nothing  was  left 
but  for  the  King  to  recall  Lord  Grey  to  power  and  con- 
sent to  the  measures  necessary  for  the  passing  of  the 
Reform  Bill.  Meantime  the  perplexed  King  was  openly 
denounced  all  over  the  country.     When  his  carriage  was 


76  The  Progress  of  the  Struggle. 

seen  in  London  it  was  surrounded  by  hooting  and  shriek- 
ing crowds.  The  guards  had  to  take  the  utmost  care 
lest  some  personal  attack  should  be  made  on  him.  Lord 
Grey  and  Lord  Brougham  insisted,  as  a  condition  of  their 
returning  to  office,  that  the  King  should  give  his  consent 
to  the  creation  of  a  sufficient  number  of  new  peers.  The 
King  yielded  at  last  and  yielded  in  dissatisfied  and  angry 
mood,  a  mood  which  was  intensified  when  Lord 
Brougham  requested  that  the  consent  should  be  put  into 
writing.  At  last  William  gave  way,  and  handed  a  piece 
of  paper  to  Lord  Brougham,  containing  the  statement 
that  "  the  King  grants  permission  to  Earl  Grey  and  to 
his  Chancellor,  Lord  Brougham,  to  create  such  a  num- 
ber of  peers  as  will  be  sufficient  to  insure  the  passing  of 
the  Reform  Bill."  When  that  consent  had  been  given 
there  was  an  end  to  the  opposition.  The  Duke  of  Well- 
ington withdrew,  not  only  from  any  part  in  the  debates 
on  the  Bill,  but  even  from  the  House  of  Lords  altogether 
until  after  the  Bill  had  been  passed.  The  Wavercrs  of 
course  gave  way.  It  would  be  no  further  use  to  oppose 
the  Bill.  Lord  WTiarncliffe  spoke  bitterly  against  it  be- 
cause he  evidently  thought  he  had  been  outwitted,  if  not 
actually  deceived,  by  the  Ministry,  but  there  was  no  fur- 
ther substantial  opposition  to  the  measure.  The  Bill 
passed  through  the  Lords  on  June  4,  and  the  Royal  as- 
sent was  given  to  the  measure  a  few  days  later. 

The  House  of  Lords,  in  yielding  without  further 
struggle,  settled  a  principle  without  which  our  constitu- 
tional system  could  now  hardly  continue  to  work.  They 
settled  the  principle  that  the  House  of  Lords  were  never 
to  carry  resistance  to  any  measure  coming  from  the 
Commons  beyond  a  certain  point — beyond  the  time  when 
it  became  unmistakably  evident  that  the  Commons  were 
in  earnest     Since  that  day  no  serious  attempt  has  been 


1832  The  End  of  Personal  Sovereignty.  77 

made  by  the  House  of  Lords  to  carry  resistance  to  the 
popular  will  any  further  than  just  such  a  period  as  will 
allow  the  House  of  Commons  to  reconsider  their  former 
decision.  When  the  House  of  Commons  have  recon- 
sidered their  decision  and  still  adhere  to  it,  it  is  now 
almost  as  clearly  settled  as  any  other  principle  in  our 
constitutional  system  that  the  House  of  Lords  are  then 
to  give  way  and  withdraw  all  further  opposition.  It  may 
be  stated  in  plain  words,  that  were  the  House  of  Lords 
now  to  depart  from  this  implied  arrangement,  some 
modification  of  our  constitutional  system,  as  regards  the 
Upper  Chamber,  would  be  inevitable.  Another  question 
settled  we  may  hope  for  ever  by  the  pressure  brought  to 
bear  upon  King  William,  was  that  which  concerns  the 
influence  of  the  Sovereign's  own  personal  will  in  legisla- 
tion. The  King  gave  way  to  the  advice  of  his  Ministers 
on  a  matter  of  vital  importance  to  the  nation,  and  on 
which  his  opinions  were  opposed  to  those  of  the  majority. 
He  yielded,  not  to  mere  argument  or  to  mere  persuasion, 
but  to  actual  pressure.  It  became  thereby  settled  that 
the  personal  will  of  the  Sovereign  was  no  longer  to  be 
a  decisive  authority  in  our  scheme  of  Government.  That 
was,  we  believe,  the  last  time  when  the  question  ever  was 
tested.  With  the  close  of  the  reign  of  William  IV.  and 
the  accession  of  Queen  Victoria  to  the  throne,  ended  that 
chapter  of  our  history  in  which  the  personal  will  of  the 
Sovereign  made  one  of  the  conditions  under  which  the 
country  is  to  be  governed.  It  is  now  satisfactorily,  and 
we  trust  finally  settled,  that  the  Sovereign  always  yields 
to  the  advice  of  the  Ministers.  As  in  the  case  of  the 
House  of  Lords  so  in  the  case  of  the  Crown,  it  may  be 
said  that  any  departure  from  the  well-established  and 
wcll-recognizcd  principle,  could  we  suppose  such  a  thing 
possible,  would  now  l:;ad  beyond  doubt  to  some  impor- 
tant modification  of  our  whole  constitutional  system. 


78  The  Progress  of  the  Struggle.  1833 

Some  alterations,  as  we  have  seen,  were  introduced 
into  the  reform  scheme  in  the  course  of  its  long  struggle 
through  both  Houses  of  Parliament.  But  its  main  fea- 
tures underwent  no  material  change.  To  us,  looking 
back  on  the  Reform  Bill  from  this  distance  of  time,  it 
seems  that  nothing  could  have  been  more  moderate  and 
even  modest  in  its  proposals.  Not  that  the  change 
effected  by  it  was  not  great.  It  amounted  in  truth  to 
something  like  a  parliamentary  revolution.  But  there 
were  certain  distinct  objects  necessary  to  be  accom- 
plished if  Parliament  was  to  remain  any  longer  in  har- 
mony with  the  spirit  of  the  country,  and  in  a  condition  to 
deal  with  its  political  wants,  and  it  is  not  easy  to  see 
how  the  change  could  have  been  effected  in  a  more 
cautious  and  a  more  gradual  way.  What  the  Reform 
Bill  actually  did  was  to  pass  sentence  on  the  system  of 
close  or  nomination  boroughs,  to  establish  in  practical 
working  order  the  principle  that  the  House  of  Commons 
was  a  representative  assembly,  bearing  due  proportion  in 
its  numbers  and  in  its  arrangement  to  the  numbers  and 
the  interests  of  the  constituents,  and  to  extend  the  suf- 
frage so  as  to  enfranchise  the  great  bulk  of  the  middle 
and  lower  middle  classes  of  the  community.  The  Re- 
form Act  was  indeed  very  far  from  bringing  representa- 
tion and  constituency  into  anything  like  exact  proportion, 
but  it  made  a  distinct  advance  in  that  way,  and  it  esta- 
blished a  principle  which  is  left  to  be  wrought  into  a  more 
perfect  system  by  future  generations.  The  Bill  was  only 
a  compromise,  but  under  all  the  circumstances  it  could 
hardly  have  been  anything  else.  Lord  Grey  and  his 
colleagues  might  have  brought  in  a  very  modest  measure 
of  reform,  some  such  scheme  as  other  reformers  were 
frequently  bringing  forward  during  the  long  dull  interval 
when  the  question  was   not  occupying  the  attention  of 


1832  Disappointment  with  the  Bill.  79 

any  Government.  Such  a  Bill,  however,  would  have 
been  almost  as  difficult  to  pass  as  that  which  they  at  last 
succeeded  in  carrying  into  law.  On  the  other  hand  they 
might  have  endeavoured  to  satisfy  the  demands  of  the 
more  Radical  members  of  the  House  of  Commons  and  of 
Radicals  generally  out  of  doors,  and  introduced  a  meas- 
ure at  once  bold  and  comprehensive  which  would  have 
settled  the  question  for  many  generations.  But  we  doubt 
very  much  whether  it  would  have  been  possible  to  carry 
such  a  Bill  just  then.  Certainly  it  would  have  involved 
the  risk  of  a  most  serious  struggle,  perhaps  of  something 
like  a  warfare  of  class  against  class.  Lord  Grey  attempted 
no  uprooting  of  ancient  institutions,  and  he  carried  with 
him  what  may  be  called  the  common  sense  and  common 
instincts  of  the  great  bulk  of  the  English  population,  in 
proceeding  strictly  on  what  were  since  his  time  called 
the  old  lines  of  the  constitution.  But  it  is  certain  that 
the  Bill  disappointed  a  great  many  not  only  outside  the 
House  of  Commons  but  within  it,  and  we  may  add  not 
only  outside  the  Government  but  even  in  the  Cabinet 
itself.  Its  one  main  defect,  as  will  aftenvards  appear, 
was  the  manner  in  which  it  left  the  great  body  of  the 
working  classes  entirely  outside  what  was  called  the  pale 
of  the  constitution.  It  redeemed  the  political  power  of 
the  State  from  being  the  monopoly  of  one  great  class, 
and  made  it  the  partnership  of  two  great  classes.  That 
was  an  advance  in  itself,  and  it  established  the  principle 
which  made  further  advance  possible.  But  it  disappointed 
those  who  found  themselves  not  better  off  but  even 
worse  off  as  regards  the  franchise  than  they  had  been 
before. 

It  is  clear  that  the  Bill  was  above  all  things  one 
which  it  would  have  been  wise  on  the  part  of  the  Con- 
servatives to  accept  with  as  little  resistance  as  possible. 


8o  The  Progress  of  the  Struggle. 

It  was  the  most  moderate  measure  of  reform  which  it  was 
possible  for  any  really  reforming  government  to  offer,  or 
which  would  have  been  accepted  by  the  people  at  large. 
It  ought,  one  would  think,  to  have  been  clear  even  then 
to  an  intelligent  Conservative,  that  the  country  would 
ttever  again  be  content  to  listen  to  any  smaller  project 
of  reform.  Yet  the  Conservatives  had  not  the  slightest 
idea  of  accepting  any  compromise.  On  the  contrary, 
they  had  strong  hopes  that  they  would  be  able  to  resist 
the  whole  reform  movement  and  beat  it  back.  There 
were  Tories  who  not  only  believed  that  the  Ck)vernment 
would  never  be  able  to  carry  any  Reform  Bill,  but  were 
even  satisfied  that  the  leaders  of  the  Government  did  not 
expect  to  succeed.  Sir  James  Graham  was  spoken  to  by 
a  member  in  the  lobby  on  the  night  after  the  first  Re- 
form Bill  had  been  explained.  The  member  who  ad- 
dressed him  complimented  him  and  his  colleagues  on 
their  courage  and  honesty,  but  added  that  he  supposed 
of  course  they  were  perfectly  prepared  to  go  out  of  office 
the  next  day. 

In  the  course  of  one  of  the  closing  debates  on  the 
Reform  Bill  in  the  House  of  Commons,  Lord  John 
Russell  made  use  of  certain  words  which  were  often 
afterwards  cited  against  him.  They  were  quoted  by  ex- 
treme reformers  to  his  reproach,  and  they  were  quoted 
by  extreme  opponents  of  reform  as  a  Ministerial  pledge 
against  further  change.  Lord  John  Russell  said,  that  in 
his  opinion  "  so  far  as  Ministers  are  concerned,  this  is  a 
final  measure.  I  declared  on  the  second  reading  of  the 
Reform  Bill  that  if  only  a  part  of  the  measure  were 
carried  it  would  lead  to  new  agitations,  but  that  is  now 
avoided  by  the  state  in  which  the  Bill  has  come  from  the 
other  House."  It  was  instantly  assumed  by  the  extreme 
advocates  of  reform  that  Lord  John  Russell   meant  by 


1833  *' Finality:'  81 

these  words  to  express  his  opinion  that  the  era  of  reform 
had  closed  in  England,  that  enough  had  been  done  in 
the  way  of  change  for  all  time,  that  the  political  system 
of  this  country  was  then  the  good  made  perfects  On  the 
other  hand,  when  many  years  after  Lord  John  Russell 
undertook  further  schemes  of  reform,  the  extreme  oppo- 
nents of  change  accused  him  of  having  broken  a  solemn 
pledge.  The  speech  was  constantly  referred  to  as  Lord 
John  Russell's  "  finality "  declaration,  and  indeed  the 
noble  Lord  himself  was  irreverently  dubbed  by  certain 
critics,  "  finality  Jack."  The  meaning,  however,  of  Lord 
John  Russell's  statement  is  perfectly  obvious,  nor  was 
there  anything  in  it  inconsistent  with  his  taking  up  fur- 
ther schemes  of  reform  at  a  distant  period.  What  he 
meant  was  that  as  regarded  that  particular  chapter  of  re- 
form. Lord  Grey's  government  felt  that  it  had  closed. 
They  had  done  enough  for  the  time.  They  knew  very 
well  that  in  English  politics  reforms  are  made  in  eras  or 
in  sections,  and  that  the  country  will  not  stand  the  ma- 
king of  fresh  changes  year  after  year.  The  habit  of  the 
English  people  is  to  lay  in  a  stock  of  reform  which  they 
believe  will  last  a  certain  time,  and  to  have  no  more  to  do 
with  the  question  until  the  time  seems  to  have  nearly  run 
out.  Any  practical  politician  would  have  seen  that  no 
matter  how  great  might  be  the  class  grievances  left  unre- 
medied by  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832,  it  would  be  impossible 
to  induce  Parliament  and  the  public  to  set  about  a  new 
scheme  of  reform  immediately  after.  Lord  John  Russell 
meant,  therefore,  as  indeed  he  said  in  plain  words,  that 
the  government  of  Lord  Grey  regarded  themselves  as 
having  done  their  part  in  the  settlement  of  reform,  and 
that  having  accomplished  so  much  they  did  not  propose 
to  attempt  anything  further.  Lord  John  Russell  it  seems 
almost  needless  to  say,  continued  to  be  as  steady  an  ad- 
G 


82  The  Progress  of  the  Struggle. 

vocate  of  reform,  after  the  passing  of  Lord  Grey's  Bill,  as 
he  had  been  before.  He  knew  well  that  the  Bill  was  but 
a  beginning  and  a  compromise,  and  that  much  more  re- 
mained to  be  done  even  in  his  own  time.  He  could  not 
be  supposed  to  shut  his  eyes  to  the  fact  that  that  artisan 
class,  with  whom  he  had  always  shown  much  sympathy, 
were  not  only  still  left  out  of  the  franchise,  but  were,  in- 
deed, deprived  of  special  franchises  and  political  privi- 
leges which  they  had  before  the  passing  of  the  Bill.  No 
one  of  Lord  John  Russell's  political  sagacity  could  have 
failed  to  see  that  the  enfranchisement  of  the  working  class 
would  become  a  "burning  question  "  before  many  years 
should  have  gone  over  the  heads  of  statesmen. 

With  the  passing  of  the  Reform  Bill,  the  name  of 
Lord  Grey  may  be  said  to  pass  out  of  history.  He 
had  done  his  own  special  and  appointed  work,  and 
had  done  it  patiently  and  well.  It  was  a  great  effort  on 
the  part  of  a  man  of  his  aristocratic  descent,  and  some- 
what cold  and  haughty  temperament,  to  interest  himself 
so  deeply  and  risk  so  much  in  a  movement  to  extend  the 
franchise  to  a  class  of  men  with  whom  he  could  have  had 
but  an  imperfectly  developed  sympathy.  His  is  not 
a  great  figure  in  history,  but  it  is  a  dignified  and  stately 
figure.  It  represented  a  great  movement,  of  which  he 
was  not  indeed  the  source  and  the  inspiration,  but  of 
which  he  was  the  successful  guide  and  the  graceful,  im- 
posing figure-head.  His  life  links  together  two  distinct 
eras  of  our  history,  which  but  for  that  connecting  bond 
would  be  completely  sundered.  Lord  Grey  began  his 
political  career  as  the  friend  and  the  associate  of  that 
great  group  of  statesmen  and  orators  of  whom  it  is  not 
too  much  to  say  that  as  a  group  they  had  not  their  rivals 
in  the  previous  history  of  England,  and  that  they  have 
not  found  their  rivals  in  the  history  of  later  days.  We  have 


1832  West  Indian  Slavery.  83 

had  since  that  time,  as  we  had  before,  many  great  names, 
names  in  themselves  perhaps  as  great  as  any  which  were 
shining  in  the  early  part  of  Lord  Grey's  career.  But 
there  was  not  before  his  time,  and  there  has  not  been 
since,  any  group  of  statesmen  who  could  be  compared 
with  the  two  Pitts,  with  Burke,  with  Fox,  with  Sheridan, 
and  with  Windham.  Amongst  such  men  Lord  Grey  did 
not  indeed  hold  a  commanding  place  ;  but  he  was  ad- 
mitted into  their  company,  he  was  looked  upon  as  one  of 
them,  and  some  of  their  lustre  is  still  allowed  to  shine 
over  his  more  modest  personal  fame. 


CHAPTER  VIL 

BLACK   AND   WHITE  SLAVERY. 

The  period  which  succeeded  the  passing  of  the  Reform 
Bill  was  one  of  immense  activity  and  earnestness  in 
legislation.  During  the  ten  years  of  the  Whig  adminis- 
tration from  1831  to  1841 — for  we  may  take  it  as  a  whole 
period,  notwithstanding  one  or  two  small  breaks  already 
mentioned  or  still  to  be  mentioned — there  were  more  plans 
and  projects  of  reform  in  all  directions  set  on  foot  and 
carried  through  than  in  any  previous  period  of  English 
history  or  in  any  subsequent  period,  if  we  except  the 
marvellous  three  or  four  years  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  first 
administration.  The  first  great  reform  was  the  complete 
abolition  of  the  system  of  slavery  in  the  British  colonies. 
The  slave  trade  had  itself  been  suppressed  so  far  as  we 
could  suppress  it  long  before  that  time,  but  now  the 
whole  system  of  West  Indian  slavery  was  brought  to  an 
end.  Despite  the  most  gloomy  prophecies  on  the  part 
of  lovers  of  the  old  system,  despite  the  elaborate  and  ex- 
haustive arguments  that  free  labour  never  could  compete 


84  Black  and  White  Slavery. 

with  slave  labour,  and  that  the  actual  ruin  of  our  sugar- 
growing  colonics  must  be  the  result  of  abolition,  the 
Government,  driven  on  by  public  opinion,  persevered 
and  put  an  end  to  slavery  in  our  colonies. 

A  long  agitation  of  the  small  but  energetic  anti-slavery 
party  brought  about  this  practical  result  in  1833.  In 
many  parts  of  the  colonial  empire  of  Great  Britain,  espe- 
cially in  the  West  India  islands,  England  had  succeeded 
to  the  inheritance  of  a  slave  system  and  of  an  immense 
number  of  negro  slaves.  Granville  Sharpe,  Zachary 
Macaulay,  father  of  the  historian  and  statesman,  Thomas 
Fowell  Buxton,  Wilberforce,  Brougham,  and  many 
others  had  for  a  long  time  been  striving  hard  to  rouse 
up  public  opinion  to  the  abolition  of  the  slave  system. 
The  slave  owners  were  strongly  represented  in  Parlia- 
ment. The  idea  that  it  was  incumbent  on  any  nation 
to  abolish  a  slave  system  which  they  found  in  existence 
was  something  new  to  the  public  in  general.  The  slave 
trade  had  already  been  abolished,  not  without  many 
struggles  and  much  difficulty,  but  the  slave  trade  seemed 
to  most  persons  to  involve  entirely  different  moral  and 
economical  principles  from  those  which  attached  to  the 
system  of  domestic  slavery.  To  many  intelligent  and 
conscientious  men  it  seemed  quite  reasonable  to  say  that 
England  should  not  allow  a  trade  to  go  on  in  the  forcible 
abduction  and  importation  of  unfortunate  negroes  from 
their  homes  in  Africa,  but  they  did  not  see  that  anything 
like  a  moral  obligation  rested  upon  England  to  abolish 
at  a  stroke  a  system  of  domestic  slavery  which  had 
grown  up  in  her  colonies  independent  of  any  action  of 
her  own,  which  she  found  existing  there,  which  had 
come  down  from  almost  all  time,  and  which  many  or 
most  of  them  believed  to  be  not  only  necessary  for  the 
development  of  colonial  interests,  but  for  the  advantage 


1832  The  Abolitionists.  85 

and  protection  of  the  slaves  themselves.  Some  three- 
quarters  of  a  million  of  slaves  would  have  to  be  convert- 
ed into  free  labourers  in  order  to  satisfy  the  appeal  which 
Granville  Sharpe  and  Wilberforce  were  making. 

Fowell  Buxton  was  in  Parliament.     Zachary  Macaulay 
had  resigned  the  management  of  a  West   Indian  estate 
because  of  his  detestation  of  the  slave  system,  and  had 
taken  a  leading  part  in  promoting  an  attempt  to  found  a 
new  negro  colony   at  Sierra   Leone,   an  attempt  which 
ended  in  failure.     He  was  a  man  who  thoroughly  under- 
stood the  condition  of  the  slave  colonics,  and  he  was  able 
to  furnish  Buxton  with  a  mass  of  hard  facts  which  were 
of  immense  influence  in  arousing  public  opinion  in  Eng- 
land.    The  most  terrible  disclosures  were  made  as  to  the 
brutal  treatment  of  the  negroes.     For  a  long  time  the 
slave  owners  had  met  every  argument  for  emancipation 
by   insisting  that  it  would   necessarily  be   followed  by  a 
negro  insurrection,  that  the  colonies  would  be  exposed  to 
the  most  terrible  danger,  and  above  all,  that  the  slaves 
were  treated  with  consideration  and  affection,  such  as 
free  labourers  hardly  ever  received  in  England  itself. 
All  the  stories  vaguely  floating  in  England  about  the  flog- 
ging of  negro  men  and  women,  the  branding  and  muti- 
lations, were  treated  as  absurd  fables  and  were  described 
as  such  with  the  overbearing  authority  of  the  men  who 
have  been  there,  and  ought  to   know.     The  facts  which 
Zachary  Macaulay  assisted  Buxton  to  collect  put  a  stop 
to  this  comfortable  way  of  dealing  with  the  question.     It 
was  shown  that  the  most  horrible  and  wholesale  system 
of  flogging  and  branding  prevailed  throughout  the  West 
Indies.     The   names,  the  facts,   the    places,   the  dates, 
were    given.     Women    actually    with    child    had    been 
scourged  with  as  many  as  a  hundred  and  seventy  lashes. 
Women  had  been   stripped,  tied  up  to  a  post,  and  left 


86  Black  and  IVJitte  Slavery.  1823-33 

there  naked  through  a  whole  day,  writhing  under  a  tropi- 
cal sun  and  with  a  flogging  inflicted  at  stated  intervals. 
Half-caste  women,  almost  as  white  as  English  women, 
were  frequently  to  be  identified  by  the  brand  on  their 
breasts.  The  newspapers  of  the  islands  constantly  con- 
tained advertisements  for  runaway  slaves.  Nearly  all  of 
these  were  to  be  identified  by  the  brandings  or  the  marks 
of  flogging.  It  was  occasionally  emphasised  as  a  means 
of  identifying  a  particular  woman  that  she  was  branded 
on  both  breasts.  So  long  before  as  May  1823,  Buxton 
brought  on  his  first  motion  for  the  abolition  of  slavery. 
The  resolution  declared  the  slavery  system  repugnant  to 
the  principles  of  the  British  Constitution  and  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  and  declared  that  it  ought  to  be  gradually 
abolished  throughout  the  British  colonies,  with  such  ex- 
pedition as  may  be  found  consistent  with  a  due  regard 
for  the  well-being  of  the  parties  concerned.  Canning 
was  then  the  leading  member  of  the  House  of  Commons. 
He  did  not  gosofaras  to  support  Buxton,  but  he  proposed 
three  resolutions  affirming  the  expediency  of  improving 
the  condition  of  the  slaves,  preparing  them  for  civil  free- 
dom, and  at  the  same  time  pledging  the  House  to  take 
care  that  all  this  should  be  compatible  with  the  well-being 
of  the  slaves,  the  safety  of  the  colonies,  and  a  full  consid- 
eration for  the  rights  of  private  property.  These  resolu- 
tions were  adopted,  and  the  colonists  urged  to  take  at 
least  one  step  towards  complying  with  their  spirit  by  abol- 
ishing the  flogging  of  women. 
The  colonies,  of  course,  were  under  different  systems 
-  of  government.  Some  were  under  the  direct  authority 
of  the  Colonial  Office,  others  were  governed  by  local 
legislatures.  Jamaica  was  one  of  these,  and  its  House 
of  Assembly  was  furious  with  anger  at  the  idea  of  the 
British  legislature  attempting  to  interfere  in  the  affairs 


1823-33       "^^^  Deinerara  Court- Martial,  87 

of  the  colony.  In  Jamaica  there  were  nearly  a  half  a 
million  of  negroes.  Barbadoes  and  Demerara,  the  latter 
a  crown  colony,  governed  directly  by  the  Colonial  Office, 
broke  into  still  greater  fury  of  wrath.  In  Demerara 
some  of  the  slaves  had  heard  vague  rumours  from  Eng- 
land that  the  day  of  their  freedom  was  coming,  and  in 
a  part  of  the  colony  they  refused  to  work.  Their  re- 
fusal was  called  an  insurrection,  and  the  insurrection 
was  stamped  out  with  the  most  savage  cruelty.  An  Eng- 
lish missionary,  the  Rev.  John  Smith,  a  dissenter,  was 
charged  with  inciting  the  slaves  to  revolt.  He  was  im- 
prisoned ;  he  was  treated  with  barbarous  severity ;  he 
was  tried  with  utter  disregard  of  most  of  the  forms  of 
justice,  found  guilty,  and  sentenced  to  death.  He  es- 
caped the  scaffold,  however.  He  died  in  consequence  of 
the  ill-treatment  he  had  suffered,  while  some  of  his 
prosecutors,  less  cruel  than  others,  were  pleading  that 
the  recommendation  to  mercy  with  which  the  court-mar- 
tial had  accompanied  its  verdict  ought  to  be  made  a 
reality.  The  whole  question  was  taken  up  in  England. 
Brougham,  Mackintosh,  and  Lushington  denounced  the 
proceedings  of  the  court-martial.  The  Ministers  reversed 
the  proceedings  of  the  court,  and  even  when  they  had 
made  this  necessary  concession  to  justice  and  decency. 
Brougham's  motion,  denouncing  the  whole  transaction, 
was  defeated  by  193  to  146.  The  Colonial  Office  at  once 
issued  new  regulations  for  the  treatment  of  slaves  in 
the  Crown  colonies.  These  regulations  prevented  the 
driver  from  carrying  a  whip  in  the  field,  abolished  alto- 
gether the  flogging  of  women,  ordered  that  no  punish- 
ment should  be  inflicted  until  twenty-four  hours  at  least 
after  the  offence,  that  no  slave  should  receive  more  than 
twenty-five  lashes  in  one  day,  and  that  married  slaves 
were  not  to  be  separated  from  their  children.     This  was 


88  Black  and  White  Slavery.  1823-33 

undoubtedly  an  improvement  so  far  as  the  Crown  colonies 
were  concerned,  but  it  was  not  easy  to  get  the  local  au- 
thories  of  Jamaica  to  legislate.  In  1826  they  did  indeed 
pass  what  professed  to  be  an  Act  to  amend  the  slave 
laws,  but  the  Act  had  nothing  really  valuable  in  it.  It 
allowed  the  use  of  a  whip  in  the  field,  and  it  did  not 
abolish  or  interfere  in  any  way  with  the  flogging  of 
women.  The  Colonial  Office  declined  to  sanction  the  Act. 
The  Jamaica  Assembly  would  not  assent  to  the  views  of 
the  Colonial  Office,  and  thus  the  supposed  reform  dropped 
through  altogether.  In  May  1830,  a  great  meeting  was 
held  in  London  to  agitate  again  for  the  total  abolition  of 
slavery,  Wilberforce,  who  had  long  been  out  of  public 
life  owing  to  illness,  presiding,  and  Mr.  Buxton  proposed 
a  resolution  calling  on  the  country  to  agitate  for  the  en- 
tire abolition  of  slavery  throughout  the  British  dominions. 
One  of  the  results  of  this  meeting  was  that  Lord 
Brougham  raised  the  whole  question  in  the  House  of 
Commons.  He  brought  forward  a  motion  in  the  close  of 
the  session  of  1830,  on  the  general  subject  of  slavery.  He 
narrated  some  of  the  most  appalling  stories  of  the  abuse 
of  despotic  power  in  the  colonics.  He  thrilled  the  House 
by  his  eloquence  and  his  passion.  His  motion  wais 
defeated,  as  the  motion  of  an  independent  member  in 
such  a  case  is  almost  sure  to  be,  but  the  course  he  had 
taken  succeeded  in  arousing  the  attention  of  the  country, 
and  making  the  question  of  abolition  one  which  no 
Government  could  long  afford  to  neglect.  Mr.  Buxton 
drew  attention  to  the  subject  the  following  year.  Lord 
Althorp,  unable  to  accept  Buxton's  propositions,  offered 
a  poor  sort  of  compromise,  the  effect  of  which  was  that 
the  colonies  which  really  improved  the  condition  of  their 
slaves  should  be  allowed  to  import  their  sugar  into  this 
country   at   reduced   rates   of  duty.      This   absurd   and 


1833  Lord  Stanley  on  Slavery.  89 

feeble  suggestion  to  bribe  the  planters  into  a  little 
moderation  towards  their  slaves  would  have  been  un- 
worthy of  serious  consideration,  even  if  the  whole  ques- 
tion had  merely  referred  to  the  physical  treatment  of 
the  unfortunate  serfs.  But  the  question,  in  the  mind  of 
Buxton,  and  now  of  the  country  in  general,  was  whether 
slavery  should  exist  at  all,  whether  it  should  be  abol- 
ished unconditionally,  or  whether,  at  least,  some  steps 
should  be  taken  to  insure  its  gradual  extinction.  Par- 
liament, however,  was  dissolved  almost  immediately 
after,  in  consequence  of  the  Reform  Bill,  and  the  newly- 
elected  House  of  Commons  was  for  some  time  occupied 
with  other  subjects.  When  Parliament  met  in  1833, 
everyone  expected  that  the  speech  from  the  throne 
would  contain  some  allusion  to  the  question  of  emanci- 
pation. No  word,  however,  in  the  speech,  long  though 
it  was,  had  any  reference  to  the  subject  of  slavery.  Bux- 
ton, therefore,  at  once  gave  notice  of  a  motion  on  the 
question,  and  appealed  to  the  Government  to  say  whether 
they  did  not  really  intend  to  introduce  a  measure  them- 
selves. The  Government  asked  for  some  time  to  con- 
sider the  course  they  could  take.  In  the  meantime, 
Lord  Goderich,  Secretary  of  the  Colonies,  had  been 
transferred  to  the  office  of  Lord  Privy  Seal,  and  the 
department  of  the  Colonics  was  placed  in  charge  of  Lord 
Stanley.  Lord  Stanley  was  just  the  man  to  undertake  a 
bold  and  hazardous  task.  He  set  to  work  to  study  the 
whole  question  of  colonial  slavery,  and  in  a  few  weeks 
after  his  acceptance  of  office,  he  was  enabled  to  state  the 
policy  of  the  Government  on  that  subject.  The  speech 
has  been  described  by  all  who  heard  it  as  a  masterpiece 
of  eloquence.  The  subject  was  one  which  exactly  har- 
monised with  his  impetuous  and  generous  nature.  When 
Lord  Stanley's  feelings  were  really  roused  in  some  grea 


^o  Black  and  White  Slavery. 

cause,  he  was  always  able  to  rise  to  the  height  of  a 
genuine  eloquence.  He  was  not  a  man  of  lofty  intellect, 
or  even,  perhaps,  of  deeply-penetrating  intelligence,  but 
his  style,  when  animated  by  feeling,  carried  with  it  all 
the  persuasiveness  and  all  the  force  which  are  especially 
adapted  to  move  an  assembly  like  the  English  Parlia- 
ment. Lord  Stanley  proposed  a  plan,  the  effect  of  which 
was  that  slavery  proper  should  cease  at  once,  but  that  in 
order  to  prepare  the  slave  for  the  freedom  he  was  ulti- 
mately to  have,  and  to  meet  the  chance  of  the  eman- 
cipated negroes  plunging  into  excesses  of  any  kind,  there 
should  be  a  transition  period — a  time  of  apprenticeship 
before  the  negro  became  a  thorough  free  man.  The 
Colonial  Secretary  moved  five  resolutions,  one  declaring 
the  opinion  of  the  House  "that  immediate  and  effectual 
measures  be  taken  for  the  entire  abolition  of  slavery 
throughout  the  colonics,  under  such  provisions  for  regu- 
lating the  condition  of  the  negroes  as  may  combine 
their  welfare  with  the  interests  of  the  proprietors."  The 
second  declared  it  expedient  that  all  children  born  after 
the  passing  of  an  Act  of  Parliament  for  this  purpose,  or 
who  should  be  under  the  age  of  six  years  at  that  time, 
should  be  declared  free  ;  "  subject,  nevertheless,  to  such 
temporary  restrictions  as  may  be  deemed  necessary  for 
their  support  and  maintenance."  The  third  declared 
all  persons  now  slaves  entitled  to  be  registered  as  appren- 
ticed labourers,  and  to  acquire  thereby  all  the  rights  and 
privileges  of  free  men,  "  subject  to  the  restriction  of 
labouring  under  conditions  and  for  a  time  to  be  fixed  by 
Parliament  for  their  present  owners."  The  fourth  resolu- 
tion enabled  the  Government  to  advance  by  way  of  a 
loan,  to  be  raised  from  time  to  time,  a  sum  not  exceeding 
1 5,000,000/.,  to  provide  against  the  risk  of  loss  which 
proprietors  of  slaves  might  sustain  by  the  abolition  of 


1833  Macaulay  and  Emancipation.  91 

slavery.  The  fifth  merely  authorised  the  Crown  to  meet 
the  expense  necessary  for  establishing  a  staff  of  stipen- 
diary magistrates  in  the  colonies,  and  giving  the  local 
magistrates  means  to  provide  for  the  religious  and  moral 
education  of  the  emancipated  slaves. 

The  first  and  second  resolutions  were  adopted  after 
some  discussion,  but  the  third  resolution,  which  contained 
the  principles  of  the  apprenticeship  system,  gave  rise  to  a 
strong  opposition.  Mr.  Buxton  himself  led  the  Opposi- 
tion, and  was  followed  by  the  professed  friends  of  eman- 
cipation. Lord  Howick,  son  of  Earl  Grey,  also  opposed 
this  part  of  the  scheme.  He  contended  that  the  proposed 
interval  of  apprenticeship  would  in  no  way  improve  the 
character  of  the  negroes,  or  render  them  more  fit  for  the 
enjoyment  of  perfect  liberty  at  the  expiration  of  twelve 
years.  He  had  given  evidence  of  his  sincerity  on  the 
subject  by  the  fact  that  he  resigned  the  office  of  Under- 
Secretary  for  the  Colonies  on  account  of  the  objection 
he  felt  to  this  part  of  the  Ministerial  scheme.  Among 
those  who  supported  the  Government  was  Mr.  T.  B. 
Macaulay,  afterwards  famous  as  the  historian,  essayist, 
and  orator.  Mr.  Macaulay  spoke  with  all  the  more 
influence  because  he  was  the  son  of  that  Zachary 
Macaulay  who  had  done  more  than  almost  any  other 
man  for  the  cause  of  emancipation,  at  a  period  when  that 
cause  was  yet  only  beginning  its  struggles,  and  seemed 
to  have  little  chance  indeed  of  approaching  success. 
Macaulay  and  others  contended  that  the  transition  from 
slavery  to  a  state  of  apprenticeship  was,  at  all  events,  a 
great  step  in  advance,  that  it  settled  the  question  of 
slavery,  and  that  the  delay  of  a  few  years  was  a  matter 
of  little  consequence,  as  long  as  absolute  emancipation 
was  to  follow  in  its  course.  Mr.  Buxton  was  prevailed 
upon  to  withdraw  his  amendment  and  substitute  another. 


pa  Black  and  White  Slavery.  1 833 

to  the  eflfect  that  the  labour  of  the  emancipated  slaves  in 
the  apprenticeship  period  should  be  for  wages.  Further 
pressure  induced  him  to  withdraw  this  amendment  too, 
but  Mr.  O'Connell,  who  had  seconded  him  and  who  was 
an  uncompromising  opponent  of  slavery  in  every  form, 
would  not  give  way,  pressed  the  amendment  to  a  division 
and  carried  forty  votes  with  him  against  324.  The  reso- 
lution which  proposed  the  loan  of  15,000,000/.  to  the 
planters  was  fiercely  opposed  by  that  party  in  Parliament 
which  represented  their  interests,  and  took  up  their 
cause.  The  Government  were  most  unwilling  to  be 
defeated  in  so  great  a  public  question,  because  of  a  mere 
difficulty  about  a  sum  of  money.  They  therefore  agreed 
to  change  the  proposed  loan  of  15,000,000/.  into  an 
absolute  gift  of  20,000,000/.  There  might  have  been  a 
good  deal  said  against  the  policy  of  an  absolute  gift. 
There  was  certainly  enough  of  what  might  be  called 
superfluous  and  unnecessary  injustice  perpetrated  or 
allowed  by  the  planters  as  a  body,  to  warrant  any 
Government  in  refusing  absolutely  to  buy  them  out  of 
their  odious  privileges.  The  Government,  however, 
acted  wisely  in  not  haggling  about  terms,  and  the  country 
was  willing  to  fling  almost  any  amount  of  money  away  in 
order  to  get  rid  of  so  detestable  a  system.  The  resolu- 
tion, therefore,  was  carried  without  a  division.  It  passed 
the  House  of  Lords  along  with  the  rest.  A  Bill  based 
on  all  the  resolutions  was  promptly  brought  in  and  easily 
carried  with  a  single  change,  reducing  the  term  of 
apprenticeship  from  twelve  years  to  seven  in  one  class 
and  seven  to  five  in  another.  Thus  the  slaves  were 
made  free,  and  the  planters  were  bought  out  of  their 
privileges.  Many  of  them  found  themselves  positively 
enriched  by  the  sum  of  money  which  fell  to  their  share. 
They  had  as  a  body  no  part  of  the  credit  of  the  emanci' 


1833  ^^'^  Factory  Commission.  93 

pation.  They  had  not  even  such  perverted  honour  as 
might  fall  to  the  lot  of  the  planters  of  the  Southern 
States  of  America,  who,  believing  themselves  justified  in 
maintaining  their  privileges,  held  both  to  the  last,  and 
preferred  war  ;  for  the  men  of  the  Southern  States  could 
only  be  forced  to  yield  by  superior  strength,  and  were  not 
to  be  bought  or  bribed  out  of  their  ill-omened  claims. 
The  Liverpool  merchants  were  deeply  concerned  in  the 
slave  trade.  Cooke,  the  famous  actor,  was  once  hissed 
in  a  Liverpool  theatre  for  some  offence  he  had  committed. 
He  came  forward  as  if  to  apologise,  and,  amid  the  silence 
of  an  expectant  audience,  hissed  out  the  words:  "There 
is  not  a  stone  in  the  walls  of  Liverpool  but  is  cemented 
by  the  blood  of  Africans."  The  saying  was  a  little  rude 
and  out  of  place  just  then,  but  it  was  metaphorically  if 
not  literally  true. 

Another  reform  of  no  small  importance  was  accom- 
plished when  tlie  charter  of  the  East  India  Company 
came  to  be  renewed  in  1833.  The  clause  giving  them  a 
commercial  monoply  of  the  trade  of  the  East  was 
abolished,  and  the  trade  thrown  open  to  the  merchants 
of  the  world. 

There  were  other  slaves  in  those  days  as  well  as  the 
negro.  There  were  slaves  at  home,  slaves  to  all  intents 
and  purposes,  who  were  condemned  to  a  servitude  as 
rigorous  as  that  of  the  negro,  and  who,  as  far  as  personal 
treatment  went,  suffered  more  severely  than  negroes  in 
the  better  class  plantations.  We  speak  now  of  the 
workers  in  the  great  mines  and  factories.  No  law  up  to 
this  time  regulated  with  anything  like  reasonable  strin- 
gency the  hours  of  labour  in  factories.  Not  merely  men, 
but  women  and  children  were  forced  to  work  for  a  num- 
ber of  hours  absolutely  inconsistent  with  physical  health. 
A  commission  was  appointed  to  investigate  the  condition 


94  Black  and  Wliite  Slavery. 

of  those  who  worked  in  the  factories.  Lord  Ashley,  since 
everywhere  known  as  the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury,  was  then 
at  the  opening  of  his  long  career  of  practical  benevolence. 
Lord  Ashley  brought  forward  the  motion  which  ended  in 
the  appointment  of  the  commission.  The  commission 
quickly  brought  together  an  immense  amount  of  evidence 
to  show  the  terrible  effect,  moral  and  physical,  of  the 
overworking  of  women  and  children,  and  an  agitation  set 
in  for  the  purpose  of  limiting  by  law  the  duration  of  the 
hours  of  labour.  This  raised  a  most  important  econo- 
mical question.  Many  men  of  undoubted  humanity  and 
good  feeling  towards  the  working  classes  were  strongly 
opposed  to  the  idea,  and  maintained  not  only  that  it  was 
an  improper  interference  with  the  operations  of  private 
industry  on  the  part  of  the  Government,  but  that  it  would 
end  in  great  injury  to  the  workers  themselves.  Lord 
Ashley,  however,  won  the  day.  The  principle  of  legisla- 
tive interference  to  protect  children  working  in  factories 
was  established  by  an  Act  passed  in  1833,  limiting  the 
work  of  children  to  eight  hours  a  day,  and  that  of  young 
persons  under  eighteen  to  sixty-nine  hours  a  week.  The 
agitation  then  set  on  foot  and  led  by  Lord  Ashley  was 
engaged  for  years  after  in  endeavouring  to  give  that 
principle  a  more  extended  application.  A  kind  of  side 
controversy  began  between  the  representatives  of  the 
landowning  interest  and  the  representatives  of  the  manu- 
facturing interest.  Many  of  the  latter  earnestly  opposed 
the  whole  plan  of  legislation.  Its  result,  they  contended, 
must  necessarily  be  to  interfere  injuriously  with  the  trade 
of  the  country,  and  thereby  to  deprive  the  men  of  the 
employment  on  which  they  and  their  families  had  to  live. 
It  would  be  impossible,  they  contended,  to  apply  any 
general  rule  to  all  the  various  branches  of  manufacturing 
industry.     It  would  be  impossible  to  find  any  one  law 


t833  "^^^  Factory  Act.  95 

which  could  work  with  equal  effect  on  different  sorts  of 
busrness  requiring  different  hours ;  on  business  which 
comes  with  a  rush  at  one  period  of  the  year  and  is  almost 
slack  at  another ;  on  business  in  which  much  depends 
on  the  assisting  labour  of  women  and  children,  and  other 
occupations  in  which  the  women  and  children  might  be 
restricted  as  to  their  labour  without  any  cessation  of  the 
operations  of  the  estabhshment.  Then,  seeing  that  the 
reform  was  greatly  pressed  by  benevolent  landowners, 
the  manufacturers  retorted  upon  them  and  asked  them 
what  was  the  condition  of  their  working  labourers.  The 
manufacturers  insisted  that  the  condition  of  children  em- 
ployed in  agricultural  labour  called  far  more  loudly  for 
the  intervention  of  the  State  than  that  of  the  children  at 
work  in  a  Lancashire  cotton  mill.  Moreover,  the  men 
employed  in  the  mills,  they  insisted,  were  well  looked 
after,  were  well  paid,  and  were  therefore  very  well  able 
to  take  care  not  only  of  themselves  but  of  their  wives 
and  children.  On  the  other  hand,  the  wretched  la- 
bourer of  Dorsetshire  or  Somersetshire  never  had  more 
than  was  just  enough  to  keep  himself  and  his  chil- 
dren from  starvation,  and  at  the  end  of  his  weary 
career  of  drudgery  the  workhouse  was  his  only  refuge. 
Why  then,  they  asked,  not  make  laws  for  him,  or  if  not 
for  him,  why  not  at  least  protect  by  legislation  his 
wife  and  his  children  from  the  consequences  of  over- 
work ? 

The  controversy  was  of  some  interest  at  the  time,  but 
it  has  little  importance  for  us  now.  Parliament  has  long 
since  established  the  principle  that  it  is  part  of  the  right 
and  the  duty  of  the  State  to  look  after  not  merely  the 
labour  of  children  but  also  the  conditions  under  which 
adult  women  are  set  to  work.  Parliament  since  that 
time  has  gone  on  advancing  and  advancing  in  the  path 


g6  Black  and  White  Slavery.  1833 

of  such  legislation.  It  will  no  doubt  some  day  or  other 
undertake  to  do  for  the  children  working  in  the  fields 
something  like  that  which  it  has  done  for  the  women  and 
children  working  in  the  factories.  It  is  now  admitted 
that  the  legislation  for  the  factories  has  worked  with 
almost  entirely  beneficent  results.  None  of  the  evils 
anticipated  from  it  have  come  to  pass.  Almost  all  the 
good  it  proposed  to  do  has  been  realised.  Each  further 
step  of  extension  in  the  same  direction  has  been  made 
with  satisfactory  results. 

Lord  Ashley  obtained  at  a  later  period  a  commission 
to  inquire  into  the  effects  of  the  employment  of  women 
and  girls  in  mines.  It  was  found  that  in  some  of  the 
coal  mines  women  were  employed  as  beasts  of  burden  in 
the  literal  sense.  The  seams  of  coal  were  sometimes  too 
narrow  to  allow  them  to  stand  upright,  and  they  had 
therefore  to  crawl  back  and  forwards  on  their  hands  and 
knees  for  fourteen  or  sixteen  hours  a  day,  drawing  after 
them  the  trucks  laden  with  coals.  These  trucks  were 
usually  made  fast  to  a  chain  which  passed  between  the 
legs  of  the  women  engaged  in  the  work,  and  was  then 
attached  to  a  belt  strapped  round  their  waists.  The 
women  seldom  wore  any  clothing  but  an  old  pair  of 
trousers  made  of  sacking.  They  were  dressed  like  the 
men,  and  only  differed  from  the  men  in  the  fact  that 
they  had  to  do  the  most  laborious  and  degrading  part  of 
the  work.  The  physical  and  moral  injuries  created  by 
such  a  state  of  things  need  hardly  be  described.  The 
mind  must  be  dull  indeed  which  has  not  imagination 
enough  to  conceive  them.  The  agitation  which  Lord 
Ashley  set  on  foot  ended  in  the  passing  of  an  Act  of 
Parliament  prohibiting  for  ever  the  employment  of  wo- 
men or  girls  underground  in  the  mines.  Children  were 
not  allowed  to  be  employed  at  all  until  they  were  at  least 


1833  Paternal  Legislation.  97 

ten  years  of  age,  and  then  their  hours  for  work  were 
limited.  Government  officials  were  intrusted  with  the 
supervision  of  the  mines  in  order  to  see  that  the  enact- 
ments were  honestly  and  thoroughly  carried  out. 

It  seems  almost  certain  that  for  some  time  to  come, 
at  least,  Parliament  will  go  on  enlarging  the  sphere  of 
its  experiments  of  1833,  in  regulating  the  hours  and  con- 
ditions of  labour  for  the  working  classes.  A  strong 
effort  has  been  recently  made  to  resist  the  claim  of 
Government  to  interfere  for  the  protection  of  the  grown 
women  employed  in  various  branches  of  industry,  and 
it  has  been  made  professedly  in  the  interest  and  on 
behalf  of  the  free  rights  of  women.  But  it  is  only  fair  to 
observe  that  until  Parliament  makes  up  its  mind  to  re- 
cognize women  as  citizens  entitled  to  a  vote,  it  is  hardly 
reasonable  to  seek  to  withdraw  from  women  the  protec- 
tion which  assuredly  those  have  a  right  to  claim  who 
are  not  allowed  to  protect  themselves.  Those  who  op- 
posed the  principle  of  the  factory  legislation  were,  how- 
ever, in  many  instances,  men  of  the  purest  and  most 
unselfish  motives,  who  sincerely  believed  that  any  at- 
tempt on  the  part  of  the  Government  or  the  legislature 
to  interfere  with  the  conditions  of  labour  would  end  not 
in  serving  but  in  seriously  injuring  the  very  class  whom 
it  was  especially  proposed  to  benefit.  The  course  of 
legislation  on  the  subject  of  labour  seems  to  have  passed 
through  three  distinct  stages  For  generations,  and  even 
for  centuries,  the  only  legislation  which  took  notice  of 
the  condition  of  the  labourer  was  legislation  to  coerce 
him,  legislation  to  put  him  absolutely  at  the  mercy  of  his 
employer.  Then  there  came  a  short  time  during  which 
it  was  maintained  that  the  working  of  economic  princi- 
ciples  and  of  absolute  freedom  of  contract  would  be 
enough  to  undo  the  evils  that  centuries  of  bad  legislation 
H 


98  The  Irish   Tithe   War  1832 

and  ignorance  of  social  and  hygienic  laws  had  engen- 
dered. "  Leave  things  to  themselves,"  was  the  dogma 
of  that  time,  "  and  they' will  come  right."  To  this  period 
succeeded  the  third  season,  that  of  energetic  desire  to 
intervene  in  every  possible  way  and  direction  for  the 
regulation  of  labour  in  the  interest  of  the  working 
classes.  This  last  period  of  activity  has  certainly  not 
yet  worked  itself  thoroughly  out.  The  evils  which  gene- 
rations of  a  different  sort  of  principle  had  created  have 
not  yet  been  wholly  rooted  out.  When  it  has  fully  done 
its  work,  it  too,  we  may  be  sure,  will  come  to  an  end. 
At  present,  however,  the  balance  has  not  yet  been  pro- 
perly adjusted,  and  legislation  has  still  something  to  do 
in  the  interest  of  the  working  man  before  it  can  repair 
all  the  injury  which  it  did  in  the  days  when  it  was  only 
busy  to  coerce  and  oppress  him. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE   IRISH   TITHE  WAR. 

Irish  tithes  were  one  of  the  grievances  which  came 
under  the  energetic  action  of  this  period  of  reform. 
The  people  of  Ireland  complained  with  justice  of  having 
to  pay  tithes  for  the  maintenance  of  the  church  esta- 
blishment in  which  they  did  not  believe,  and  under 
whose  roof  they  never  bent  in  worship.  Sydney  Smith 
had  well  said  of  the  Irish  Church  in  his  own  peculiar 
fashion  :  "  There  is  no  abuse  like  it  in  all  Europe,  in  all 
Asia,  in  all  the  discovered  parts  of  Africa,  and  in  all  we 
have  ever  heard  of  Timbuctoo."  "  On  an  Irish  Sabbath," 
he  said,  "  the  bell  of  a  neat  parish  church  often  summons 
to  church  only  the  parson  and  an  occasionally  conform- 
ing  clerk,   while   two   hundred    yards   off   a    thousand 


1832  The  Strike  against  Tithes.  99 

Catholics  are  huddled  together  in  a  miserable  hovel  and 
pelted  by  all  the  storms  of  heaven."  To  the  collection 
of  tithes,  he  declared,  "  in  all  probability  about  one 
miUion  of  lives  may  have  been  sacrificed  in  Ireland."  A 
miserable,  petty  civil  war  was  always  smouldering;  many 
times  the  parson's  dues  had  to  be  collected  at  the  point 
of  the  bayonet  and  with  the  aid  of  musket  shot.  Riots 
took  place.  Men  were  killed  on  both  sides.  One  of  the 
most  thrilling  speeches  ever  made  by  O'Connell  was  that 
in  which  he  describes  a  fearful  scene  that  took  place 
at  a  tithe  riot,  when  a  blind  man  was  led  near  the 
scene  of  the  struggle  by  a  little  girl,  his  daughter,  A 
bullet  from  one  of  the  police,  passing  across  the  field  of 
fight,  struck  the  harmless  child  and  killed  her,  and  the 
blind  father  found  her  blood  flowing  over  his  hands.  It 
is  stated  that  Charles  Dickens  was  a  reporter  in  the 
Gallery  at  the  time  when  O'Connell  made  this  speech. 
He  was  skilled  in  his  craft  to  an  extent  which  has  rarely 
been  equalled,  but  he-  threw  down  his  pencil  in  the 
middle  of  the  speech,  and  declared  himself  so  much 
overpowered  by  the  pathos  of  the  description  and  of  the 
orator's  manner  that  he  was  unable  to  get  on  with  his 
task.  In  the  county  of  Kildare  a  very  serious  struggle 
arose,  partly  out  of  the  tithe  question  pure  and  simple, 
and  partly  out  of  a  broader  religious  controversy.  There 
were  two  over-zealous  curates  of  the  Established  Church 
in  neighbouring  parishes.  One  anxious  to  rebuild  the 
parish  church  succeeded  "by  packing  a  vestry  with 
Protestants,"  as  Mr.  Walpole  puts  it  in  his  "  History  of 
England,"  in  obtaining  a  rate  for  the  purpose.  The 
example  was  followed  by  the  other  clergyman.  The 
parishioners,  irritated  by  this,  formed  an  association  in 
which  they  determined  never  to  pay  tithe  or  church  cess 
in  voluntary  cash  payment  again.     The  unpopularity  of 


loo  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  1832 

the  Protestant  clergymen  of  that  district  greatly  increased. 
An  act  done  by  one  of  them  tended  to  embitter  it.  The 
Roman  Catholic  priest  had  been  usually  exempted  in 
Ireland  from  the  payment  of  the  tithe,  to  which,  no 
doubt,  he  as  well  as  any  other  parishioner  was  legally 
liable.  In  one  instance,  however,  a  clerg>'man  who  was 
also  a  magistrate  for  the  county  and  tithe  proctor  to  the 
incumbent,  an  absentee,  departed  from  the  usual  conve- 
nient principle,  demanded  tithes  from  the  priest,  and 
seized  the  priest's  horse  in  default  of  payment.  The 
parish  priest  of  the  place  denounced  from  the  pulpit  the 
whole  system  and  principle  of  tithes.  Shortly  after  the 
cattle  of  two  farmers  were  seized  for  tithes,  and  were 
released  only  on  a  promise  that  they  should  be  brought  up 
for  sale  in  a  fortnight.  An  impression  got  abroad  among 
the  tithe  collectors  that  the  cattle  would  not  be  brought 
up  on  the  appointed  day.  The  clergyman  applied  for 
assistance  and  a  strong  force  of  police  was  brought  to 
the  place.  The  principal  town  of  the  place  was  occu- 
pied by  more  than  three  hundred  police,  while  dragoons 
and  infantry  were  stationed  at  adjoining  villages.  The 
police  were  turned,  for  the  time,  into  cattle  drivers ;  per- 
haps it  should  rather  be  said  that  they  were  turned  for 
the  time  into  a  foraging  party  engaged  in  futile  attempts 
to  get  cattle  in  order  to  drive  them  off.  Wherever  the 
police  were  supposed  to  be  coming  the  cattle  were  locked 
up,  and  it  was  not  legal  to  break  open  a  lock  in  order  to 
get  at  them.  The  efforts  of  the  police  were  therefore,  in 
most  instances,  reduced  to  nothing.  In  some  few  ex- 
ceptional cases  where  the  police  did  succeed  in  capturing 
some  of  the  cattle,  no  bidder  could  be  found  for  them  at 
the  sale  except  the  owner  himself.  They  had  therefore 
to  be  sold  for  a  merely  nominal  price.  A  tithe  collection 
which  had  to  be  conducted  on  this  principle  naturally 


1832  Organized  Resistance.  loi 

brought  but  little  profit  to  the  Church  authorities.  The 
same  kind  of  dexterity  and  perseverance  was  shown  in 
evading  the  collection  of  tithes  which  in  later  days  has 
been  shown  in  evading  the  levy  of  distress  warrants  for 
the  collection  of  arrears  of  rent.  It  required  the  march- 
ing and  counter  marching  of  fatigue  parties,  reconnais- 
sances, sorties,  military  expeditions  of  various  kinds,  and 
a  regular  army  of  police  and  soldiers  to  secure  to  a 
country  clergyman  the  tithes  which  he  claimed  of  a 
reluctant  and  hostile  parish. 

The  resistance,  thus  brought  into  organised  shape, 
was  not  slow  in  spreading  over  parishes  and  counties. 
It  was  not  then  lawful  to  hold  a  public  meeting  in  Ire- 
land, but  no  law  prevented  people  from  gathering  toge- 
ther for  an  Irish  sport  called  a  hurling  match.  Great 
meetings  were  brought  together  in  this  way.  There  was 
an  appointment  for  a  hurling  match.  People  came  fre- 
quently armed,  and  made  no  scruple  about  admitting 
that  their  object  was  not  to  see  who  could  send  the  ball 
farthest  along  the  road,  or  across  the  fields,  but  who 
could  lend  the  most  efficient  assistance  in  driving  the 
tithe  system  out  of  the  country.  Intimidation  was  exer- 
cised by  these  crowds  upon  mild  parishioners  who  were 
willing  to  pay  the  tithe  which  they  detested  for  the  sake 
of  living  at  quiet  with  their  neighbours.  They  were 
taught  to  feel  that  if  they  could  by  this  process  conciliate 
the  Protestant  clergy,  and  relieve  themselves  from  inter- 
ference by  the  police,  they  only  brought  down  on  their 
shoulders  the  much  more  formidable  oppression  of  their 
fellow-religionists  and  fellow-parishioners.  Resistance 
to  the  payment  of  tithes  very  soon  grew  into  organised 
resistance  to  the  payment  of  rent.  When  men  were 
made  prisoners  for  neaily  any  offence  of  this  kind  it  was 
found    practically  impossible  to    obtain    a    conviction. 


I02  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  1832 

Lord  Grey  announced  on  one  occasion  that  the  Govern- 
ment were  determined  to  enforce  the  law  while  it  existed, 
but  enforcement  of  the  law  in  any  practical  sense  was 
now  out  of  the  question.  With  great  good  fortune  and 
almost  supernatural  courage  and  energy  the  Government 
might  possibly  have  succeeded  in  punishing  any  very 
daring  and  exceptional  offender  against  the  public  peace, 
but  the  idea  of  securing  the  collection  of  tithes  by  any 
administrative  energy  or  ability  was  no  longer  to  be 
entertained  by  any  rational  creature.  Armies  could  not 
have  collected  the  tithes,  and  the  very  efforts  to  collect 
them  only  brought  increased  and  increasing  hardship 
and  distress  on  the  poorer  of  the  Protestant  clergy  them- 
selves. Active  resistance  may  be  easily  put  down,  even 
by  a  weak  Government,  but  a  determined  and  organised 
passive  resistance,  suppressed  here  and  there,  but  al- 
ways reforming  itself  on  opportunity  and  having  the  sym- 
pathy of  the  great  mass  of  the  community,  is  beyond  the 
reach  of  any  administrative  power. 

Many  of  the  Protestant  clergymen  themselves  were  be- 
ginning to  find  their  positions  untenable,  and  to  lament  the 
unavailing  bloodshed  which  attended  the  effort  to  collect 
the  obnoxious  tithes.  Their  own  interests  were  gradually 
bringing  them  to  join  with  their  opponents  in  desiring  an 
abolition  of  the  system.  A  committee  of  the  House  of 
Lords  reported  that  a  complete  extinction  of  tithes  was 
required,  not  only  for  the  welfare  of  Ireland  but  for  the 
interests  of  the  Church  itself,  and  added  that  this  extinc- 
tion might  be  obtained  "  by  commuting  them  for  a  charge 
upon  land,"  or  by  "  an  exchange  for  an  investment  in 
land."  A  committee  of  the  House  of  Commons  made  a 
report  in  which  they  declared  themselves  unable  to  shut 
their  eyes  to  the  absolute  necessity  of  an  extensive  change 
in  the  present  system  of  providing  for  the  ministers  of 


1832  Government  Action.  103 

the  Established  Church.  They  gave  it  as  their  opinion 
that  such  a  change,  to  be  satisfactory  and  secure,  "  must 
involve  a  complete  extinction  of  tithes,  including  those  of 
lay  impropriators,  by  commuting  them  for  a  charge  upon 
land."  These  reports,  therefore,  from  the  two  Houses  of 
Parliament,  were  produced  in  1832.  They  practically 
agreed  in  purpose,  and  each  of  them  suggested  a  tempo- 
rary measure  for  the  relief  of  the  interests  now  suffering 
under  the  struggle.  They  recommended  that  the  Gov- 
ernment should  be  authorised  to  advance  to  every  incum- 
bent a  sum  not  exceeding  the  amount  due  to  him  as  tithes 
for  1831,  and  that  the  Government  should  then  be  au- 
thorised to  buy  up  the  arrears  of  tithes  and  to  repay 
itself  for  its  advances  out  of  the  sum  which  they  might 
recover. 

On  March  8,  1832,  the  Government  announced  their 
intention  to  take  steps  to  give  efTect  to  the  object  of  these 
reports.  It  was  also  announced  that  the  Government 
desired  to  supplement  their  measure  for  the  temporary 
collection  of  tithes  by  some  Bill  which  would  result  in 
their  absolute  extinction,  either  by  commuting  them  for 
a  charge  on  land  or  exchanging  them  for  real  property. 
The  House  of  Lords  accepted  the  measure  easily  enough, 
with  no  resistance  greater  than  was  contained  in  a  pro- 
test from  Lord  Eldon.  The  House  of  Commons  were 
not  equally  willing  to  accept  the  scheme.  On  the  part 
of  the  Irish  members  it  was  insisted  that  the  only  change 
was  to  turn  the  Government  into  a  tithe  collector,  and 
that  the  existence  of  tithes,  not  the  mode  of  their  collec- 
tion, was  the  grievance  of  which  Ireland  complained. 
The  Government,  however,  succeeded  in  carrying  three 
resolutions,  affirming  that  a  difficulty  had  arisen,  that  it 
would  be  expedient  for  the  time  to  distribute  a  sum  of 
money  among  distressed  incumbents,  and  authorising  the 


I04  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  1834 

Government  to  collect  the  tithes  the  best  way  they  could, 
in  order  to  recover  these  advances.  Having  obtained 
the  carrying  of  these  resolutions,  they  went  a  little 
further  by  adding  two  resolutions  which  pledged  the 
Legislature  to  deal  with  the  tithe  system  as  a  whole  at 
the  earliest  opportunity.  The  Bill,  when  thus  made 
complete,  was  opposed  in  various  ways  in  both  Houses, 
but  it  carried  substantial  majorities  at  each  reading  and 
at  each  stage,  and  finally  passed  into  law. 

Year  after  year  the  Government  kept  tinkering  at  the 
tithe  system.  They  tried  various  plans  of  composition 
for  tithes,  now  leaving  the  task  of  collection  to  the  land- 
lord who  compounded,  and  now  accepting  it  as  the  busi- 
ness of  the  State  and  making  grants  of  money  to  supply 
deficiencies.  O'Connell  once  said  the  Government  had 
made  the  Lord-Lieutenant  tithe-proctor-general  for  Ire- 
land. But  the  viceregal  tithe-proctor  could  not  get 
in  his  tithes  any  more  than  the  parson's  tithe-proctor 
had  done.  In  1833  the  arrears  of  tithes  amounted  to 
nearly  a  million  and  a  quarter  of  money.  The  Govern- 
ment prevailed  on  the  House  of  Commons  to  advance  a 
million  to  be  handed  over  to  the  tithe  owners  on  the 
security  of  the  arrears,  and  the  House  saw  the  water 
poured  into  the  sieve.  The  tithe  question  was  but  a  part 
of  the  Church  question  in  Ireland.  That  general  question 
was  brought  up  in  1834  by  Mr.  Ward,  one  of  the  most 
rising  among  the  new  members  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. He  was  a  son  of  that  Plumer  Ward,  author  of  a 
popular  novel  once  called  "  Tremaine,"  which  now  lives 
in  the  memory  of  novel  readers  less  by  virtue  of  its  own 
merits  than  by  the  fact  that  it  is  referred  to  in  Lord 
Beaconsfield's  "Vivian  Grey."  Henry  Ward  won  some 
distinction  afterwards  as  an  administrator  in  the  Ionian 
Islands  and   in   Ceylon.     Mr.   Walpole,   in  his    "  His- 


1834  ^^  -^''•f^  Church.  105 

tory  of  England,"  says  that  Ward  is  remembered  by 
a  few  persons  "  for  the  witty  epigram  which  praises  his 
memory  at  the  expense  of  his  affections."  The  epigram 
is: 

Ward  has  no  heart,  they  say,  but  I  deny  it ; 

He  has  a  heart,  and  gets  his  sjieeches  by  it. 

These  lines,  however,  we  think,  were  not  written  for 
Henry  Ward.  They  were  written  by  Rogers  and  re- 
ferred to  John  W.  Ward,  afterwards  Lord  Dudley  and 
Ward.  Henry  Ward,  however,  was  at  this  time  a  rising 
politician,  and  had  formed  very  strong  opinions  with 
regard  to  the  condition  and  the  revenues  of  the  Irish 
Church.  He  was  convinced  that  the  revenues  were  much 
more  than  sufficient  for  the  requirements  of  the  Establish- 
ment, and  that  any  surplus  not  needed  for  the  Church 
ought  to  be  appropriated  by  Parliament  to  other  and 
more  public  purposes.  He  brought  forward  a  resolution 
setting  forth  this  opinion.  The  debate  on  the  resolution 
was  fixed  for  May  27,  1834,  and  it  formed  an  era  in  the 
history  of  the  Irish  Church  Establishment. 

Many  persons,  among  whom  Lord  Palmerston  was 
one,  were  of  opinion  that  Mr.  Ward,  in  bringing  forward 
his  motion,  was  acting  merely  on  the  inspiration  of  Lord 
Durham.  It  is  not  at  all  imlikely  that  Lord  Durham 
may  have  suggested  the  course  which  at  that  time  seemed 
so  bold. 

Mr.  Ward's  motion  declared  "that  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Establishment  in  Ireland  exceeds  the  spiritual 
wants  of  the  Protestant  population,  and  that  it  being  the 
right  of  the  State  to  regulate  the  distribution  of  Church 
property  in  such  manner  as  Parliament  may  determine, 
it  is  the  opinion  of  this  House  that  the  temporal  pos- 
sessions of  the  Church  of  Ireland  as   now  established 


io6  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  1834 

ought  to  be  reduced."  This  would  seem  to  us  now  to  be 
so  plain  a  statement  of  fact  as  hardly  to  call  for  any 
argument.  But  at  that  time  it  was  regarded  as  the  in- 
troduction of  a  new  and  daring  principle.  The  argu- 
ments with  which  Mr.  Ward  sustained  his  proposition 
went  in  their  tendency  far  beyond  the  limits  of  the  reso- 
lution which  he  moved.  The  purpose  of  the  resolution 
really  was  to  lay  down  the  principle  that  the  State  had  a 
right  to  consider  the  existence  of  the  Irish  Church  as  de- 
pendent upon  its  practical  uses  for  the  Irish  people.  Mr. 
Ward  went  on  to  show  that  the  tithe  collection  was  the 
principal  cause  of  the  disturbance  and  tumult  that  had 
lately  been  spreading  over  Ireland.  He  proved  that  the 
objection  and  resistance  to  the  payment  of  tithes  was  not 
now  any  longer  confined  to  the  Catholics  only.  It  had 
spread  from  Catholics  to  Protestants,  from  one  part  of 
the  country  to  all  parts.  The  arrangement  in  existence 
at  that  time  and  established  by  Government  compromise 
would  end  with  the  close  of  the  autumn,  and  then  either 
the  Church  must  fall  back  to  its  old  rough  system  of 
tithe  collection  or  be  maintained  out  of  the  civil  funds  of 
the  State.  The  tithe-collectors  had  tried  civil  law  and 
military  force,  and  in  vain.  Mr.  Ward  mentioned  the 
astonishing  fact  that  for  a  period  of  about  eight  years 
there  had  been  maintained  in  Ireland  an  army  almost 
exactly  as  strong  as  that  which  was  required  for  the 
government  of  our  whole  Indian  Empire.  It  fell  short 
only  by  one-third  of  the  military  strength  which  was 
needed  to  occupy  all  our  colonies  in  the  rest  of  the 
world  besides.  From  1825  to  1833  the  military  force 
had  been  little  below  20,000  at  its  lowest  and  about 
23,000  at  its  highest.  During  the  year  preceding  Mr. 
Ward's  motion  this  military  force  had  cost  more  than  a 
million   of  money.     The  cost  of  the   police    force  was 


1834  1^^  Irish  Church.  107 

about  300,000/.  in  addition.  The  Government  had 
spent  26,000/.  in  collecting  12,000/.  of  tithes.  Mr.  Ward 
also  pointed  out  one  great  abuse  of  the  Irish  Church 
system,  which  consisted  in  the  grossly  unfair  distribution 
of  its  revenues,  the  immense  sums  paid  to  clergymen 
who  had  nothing  to  do,  and  the  exceedingly  small  and 
miserable  stipends  doled  out  to  some  of  the  clergy  who 
did  whatever  work  there  was  to  be  done.  There  were 
nearly  as  many  clergy  non-resident  as  resident.  Some 
of  the  non-resident  clergy  had  benefices  varying  in 
value  from  800/.  to  2,800/.  a  year.  Some  of  the  resident 
clergy,  who  did  the  work,  had  in  certain  cases  incomes 
as  low  as  20/.  a  year.  An  income  of  70/.  was  above  the 
average.  What  kind  of  respect,  Mr.  Ward  asked,  can 
the  Irish  people  have  for  such  an  institution,  when 
they  see  its  actual  work  done  for  a  miserably  small  sum, 
and  the  great  bulk  of  its  revenue  given  away  to  men 
who  do  nothing  ?  How,  he  asked,  is  it  possible  to  sup- 
pose that  the  existence  of  such  an  institution,  worked  in 
such  a  way,  could  attract  the  Irish  Catholics  towards  it 
and  make  them  feel  inclined  to  seek  comfort  in  its  minis- 
trations ?  He  showed  that  rather  less  than  one-four- 
teenth of  the  whole  population  of  Ireland  belonged  to 
the  State  Church.  Indeed,  he  brought  together  such  a 
monstrous  array  of  anomalies  and  abuses  as  probably 
could  not  have  been  found  in  the  contemporary  history 
of  any  other  civilized  country.  Mr.  Ward  recommended 
a  redistribution  of  the  Church  revenues  in  some  way 
which  might  proportion  the  pay  to  the  work,  and  give 
the  pay  to  the  men  who  did  the  work.  With  regard  to 
the  tithe  system,  he  was  for  its  entire  abolition,  because, 
as  he  showed,  the  grievance  was  not  one  which  could  be 
remedied  by  any  improvement  in  the  manner  of  collect- 
ing the  tax.     The  objection  was  deep  and  essential,  and 


io8  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  1834 

consisted  in  the  fact  that  the  great  majority  who  paid  the 
tax  for  the  support  of  the  Church  were  Cathohcs,  who 
did  not  acknowledge  its  supremacy  and  who  could  never 
be  induced  to  cross  the  threshold  of  any  of  its  temples. 
Mr.  Ward  made  it  clear  that  the  maintenance  of  the 
Church,  such  as  it  was,  cost  the  Government  a  sum  of 
money  far  beyond  the  value  of  the  revenues  attached  to 
the  Church,  large  as  they  were,  and  that  even  as  a  mat- 
ter of  economy  it  would  be  cheaper  to  pay  the  Irish 
clergy  out  of  the  public  funds  than  to  allow  the  existing 
system  to  continue  any  longer. 

The  motion  was  seconded  by  Mr.  Grote,  the  historian 
of  Greece.  Even  at  this  comparatively  early  day  the 
best  independent  intellect  of  the  House  of  Commons 
was  already  engaged  in  an  effort  to  draw  the  attention  of 
the  country  to  the  vast  fundamental  difference  between 
the  conditions  of  the  State  Church  in  Ireland,  and  those 
of  the  State  Church  in  England.  Mr.  Grote's  speech 
was  a  remarkable  contribution  to  a  memorable  debate. 
He  addressed  himself  chiefly  to  the  task  of  showing  how 
wide  was  the  difference  between  the  principles  on  which 
the  two  State  Churches  rested.  His  speech  was  in  fact 
a  clear  and  just  argument  to  show  that  not  only  were  the 
principles  different  but  that  they  were  fundamentally 
antagonistic.  Those,  he  said,  who  compared  the  two 
churches  would  only  degrade  the  one  without  elevating 
the  other.  They  were  not  only  not  the  same,  but  they 
were  actually  opposed  in  spirit  and  in  principle.  On< 
church,  as  he  showed,  rested  its  claim  to  be  national  o. 
the  plain  broad  fact  that  it  represented  the  religiou;. 
convictions  of  the  great  majority  of  the  people.  More 
than  this  it  was,  from  its  representative  position,  in  this 
respect  the  natural  and  the  only  guardian  of  what  we 
may  call  the  waifs  and  strays  of  the  population.     If  a 


1834  Divisions  in  the  Cabinet.  109 

parentless  child  were  found  in  the  streets  or  were 
brought  to  one  of  the  public  institutions,  nothing  could 
be  more  reasonable,  nothing  in  fact  could  be  more  neces- 
sary, than  that  it  should  be  supposed  to  belong  to  the 
Church  which  expressed  the  religious  feelings  of  the 
great  bulk  of  the  English  people.  On  the  other  hand 
the  State  Church  in  Ireland  represented  at  the  very  most 
the  religious  opinions  of  one-fourteenth  of  the  popula- 
tion, and  both  Mr.  Ward  and  Mr.  Grote  gave  it  as  their 
opinion  that  one-fourteenth  was  too  large  a  proportion 
for  the  members  of  the  Episcopalian  Church  when  com- 
pared with  the  Roman  Catholics  and  the  Dissenters  of 
Ireland.  Mr.  Grote's  speech,  though  very  short,  was 
very  effective,  and  must,  one  would  think,  have  made 
some  impression  on  the  political  intelligence  of  the 
time. 

It  was  known  already  to  everyone  that  Mr.  Ward's 
motion  was  certain  to  lead  to  distraction  and  to  division 
in  the  Cabinet  itself.  Lord  Brougham  had  been  endea- 
vouring to  establish  a  compromise  by  suggesting  that  a 
commission  should  be  appointed  to  inquire  into  the  re- 
venues of  the  Irish  Church,  and  the  proportion  which  her 
revenues  bore  to  the  whole  population  of  Ireland.  It  is 
clear  that  this  was  a  suggestion  which  opponents  of  dis- 
establishment could  not  possibly  accept.  A  man  like 
Lord  Stanley,  for  instance,  whose  principle  it  was  that 
the  Irish  Church  must  be  maintained,  both  as  a  piece  of 
mechanism  for  the  sustentation  of  English  power  and  as 
a  possible  agency  towards  the  ultimate  conversion  of  the 
Irish  people  to  Protestantism,  could  not  possibly  admit 
that  the  future  fate  of  the  Church  should  depend  upon 
the  proportion  of  worshippers  which  entered  the  doors  of 
its  temples.  Once  start  such  a  principle  as  this,  and  the 
result,  however  long  postponed,  was  certain  to  follow. 


no  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  1834 

Once  admit  that  the  State  had  the  right  to  dispose  of 
the  revenues  of  the  Irish  Church  itself  with  any  regard 
for  the  opinions  and  professions  of  the  majority  of  the 
Irish  public,  and  there  could  be  no  issue  but  one ;  the 
Church  State  Establishment  must  fall.  Lord  Stanley, 
therefore,  set  himself  against  any  compromise  and  any 
commission  such  as  Brougham  proposed.  Mr.  Ward's  in- 
troduction of  his  motion  led  at  once  to  the  resignation  of 
Lord  Stanley  the  Colonial  Secretary,  Sir  James  Graham 
First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty,  Lord  Ripon  Privy  Seal,  and 
the  Duke  of  Richmond  Postmaster-General.  On  the 
very  night  when  Mr.  Ward  brought  forward  his  motion 
Lord  Althorp  learnt  that  his  colleagues  had  resigned, 
and  rose  to  ask  the  House  for  the  adjournment  of  the 
debate. 

It  was  after  Mr.  Grote's  speech  that  Lord  Althorp 
thii^  appealed  to  the  House  of  Commons  to  consent  to  an 
adjournment,  because,  as  he  said,  of  facts  which  had 
come  to  his  knowledge  since  the  debate  began.  He 
frankly  acknowledged  that  it  was  not  in  his  power  at 
present  to  state  the  exact  nature  of  the  facts,  but  he 
appealed  to  the  House  to  accept  his  assurance,  that  he 
would  not  have  made  such  a  proposition  without  having 
been  satisfied  of  its  propriety  and  its  necessity.  Every- 
one knew  at  once  that  the  Ministerial  crisis  had  come. 
Everyone  knew  also  what  its  cause  and  its  nature  must 
have  been,  and  most  people  were  able  even  to  tell  in 
advance  the  names  of  the  men  on  both  sides  who  were 
concerned  in  the  undoubted  disruption  of  the  Ministry. 
Before  the  crisis  was  complete  some  of  the  independent 
or  semi-independent  friends  of  the  Ministry  hastened  to 
get  up  an  address  to  Lord  Grey,  imploring  him,  what- 
ever might  happen,  to  remain  at  the  head  of  the  Govern- 
ment, and  declaring  that  the  confidence  of  the  House  of 


1834  Changes  in  the  Ministr)'.  iix 

Commons  and  of  the  country  was  still  entirely  given  to 
him.  Lord  Grey,  in  replying  to  the  address,  declared 
that  he  was  prepared  to  make  every  personal  sacrifice  in 
support  of  the  principles  for  which  he  had  taken  office, 
but  he  complained  in  his  clear,  cold,  and  somewhat 
sharp  manner,  of  the  harm  that  was  being  done  to  the 
progress  of  Liberal  principles  by  the  heedless  desire  for 
innovation.  He  declared  that  to  him  it  seemed  indispen- 
sable, if  any  improvement  was  to  be  made  in  the  institu- 
tions of  the  country,  that  the  Government  should  be 
allowed  to  go  on  with  deliberation  and  with  caution,  and 
that  they  should  not  be  harassed  by  a  constant  pressure 
from  without  to  go  further  and  faster  than  seemed  neces- 
sary to  them.  Lord  Grey's  reply  made  it  more  clear  than 
almost  anything  else  had  done  that  a  crisis  had  arisen  in 
the  history,  not  merely  of  the  Whig  Cabinet  but  of  the 
Liberal  party.  It  was  evident  that  the  time  had  now 
come  when  a  certain  number  of  the  Whigs  were  disin- 
clined to  go  any  further.  The  Liberal  party  was  now 
distinctly  dividing  itself  into  Whigs  and  Radicals.  On 
the  other  hand  some  who  up  to  that  moment  were  Whigs 
were  now  clearly  about  to  fall  away  and  join  the  Con- 
servative ranks.  The  impulse  and  the  energy  of  the 
reform  movement  had  welded  together  for  a  certain  time 
three  strands  of  the  party,  the  Conservative  portion,  the 
Whig  portion,  the  Radical  portion.  The  strands  were 
now  about  to  separate. 

The  adjournment  of  the  debate  took  place  as  a  matter 
of  course.  There  was  nothing  to  be  done  but  to  adjourn 
and  give  the  Government  time  to  reorganize  itself.  The 
discussion  was  resumed  with  the  reconstitution  of  the 
Ministry.  Lord  Conyngham  had  become  Postmaster- 
General  in  place  of  the  Duke  of  Richmond.  Lord  Auck- 
land had  taken  Sir  James  Graham's  position  at  the  head 


112  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  1834 

of  the  Admiralty,  Lord  Carlisle  became  Privy  Seal,  and 
Mr.  Spring-Rice,  after\vards  Lord  Monteagle,  who  had 
been  for  some  years  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  succeeded 
Lord  Stanley  in  the  Colonial  Ofifice.  When  the  debate 
was  renewed  Lord  Althorp  rose  and  announced  to  Mr. 
Ward  that  the  Government  had  made  up  their  minds  to 
issue  a  commission  to  inquire  into  the  whole  question  as 
to  the  revenues  and  organisation  of  the  Irish  Church, 
and  he  appealed  to  Mr.  W^ard  to  withdraw  his  motion  in 
favour  of  this  proposal,  urging  that  there  would  have  to 
be  an  inquiry  by  commission  or  otherwise  before  legis- 
lation could  take  place  even  if  Mr.  Ward's  motion  were 
carried,  and  therefore  it  would  be  as  well  to  save  the 
trouble  of  a  debate  and  a  division,  and  issue  a  commis- 
sion at  once.  To  this  Mr.  Ward  made  a  very  reasonable 
answer.  He  admitted  that  the  commission  would  have 
to  be  issued,  but  if  his  resolution  were  carried  the  com- 
mission woild  be  issued  under  very  different  auspices 
from  those  ^vhich  would  surround  it  if  it  were  to  be  issued 
before  the  adoption  of  his  motion.  His  resolution,  if 
carried,  would  pledge  the  House  of  Commons  to  the 
principle  that  the  revenues  of  the  State  Church  in  Ireland 
were  absolutely  under  the  control  of  Parliament.  That 
principle,  it  is  true,  the  present  Ministry  fully  acknow- 
ledged, and  therefore  a  commission  issued  by  them 
would  no  doubt  be  animated  by  the  recognition  of  such 
a  fact.  But  they  might  go  out  of  office  at  any  moment. 
Facts  occurring  every  day  showed  that  their  tenure  of 
power  was  not  particularly  secure,  nor  their  continued 
coherence  much  to  be  depended  on.  Their  successors, 
therefore,  would  be  by  no  means  pledged  to  any  such 
principle,  or  to  any  course  of  action  to  follow  a  report 
from  the  rnnmission.  On  the  other  hand  a  distinct 
and  delib-T"\e  vote  of  the  House  of  Commons  would 


1834  The  Previous  Question.  113 

undoubtedly,  Mr.  Ward  contended,  have  some  influence 
over  the  action  of  any  subsequent  Ministry,  however 
illiberal  and  reactionary.  He  therefore  firmly  refused 
to  withdraw  his  motion.  Lord  Althorp  then  said  he 
had  no  course  left  but  to  evade  the  difficulty  by  moving 
the  previous  question. 

Perhaps  it  may  be  an  advantage  to  some  of  our  read- 
ers unskilled  in  the  formalities  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, to  explain  what  is  meant  by  moving  the  previous 
question.  A  motion  for  some  particular  purpose  is  be- 
fore the  House  of  Commons.  That  motion  is  what  is 
called  a  question.  The  Government  are  not  disinclined 
to  admit  the  principle  contained  in  the  motion,  but  they 
have  some  reason  for  thinking  the  present  time  unsuited 
for  such  a  debate.  They  are  unable  to  vote  for  the 
motion  because  they  think  its  discussion  inconvenient 
and  perhaps  dangerous  just  then.  They  do  not  feel 
inclined  to  vote  directly  against  it,  because  that  might 
imply  that  they  are  opposed  to  its  general  principle, 
which  they  are  not.  It  is  therefore  open  to  them  to  get 
out  of  the  difficulty  by  moving  "  the  previous  question,"  as 
it  is  called;  that  is,  by  raising  the  question  whether  the 
motion  ought  to  be  put.  They  move,  in  substance,  as  an 
amendment  that  this  is  not  the  proper  time  for  discussing 
the  question,  and  that  the  motion  before  the  chair  be  not 
put  to  a  division.  Lord  Althorp  voted  in  this  instance 
that  Mr.  Ward's  motion  be  not  put  to  a  division.  The 
debate  which  followed  was  animated,  and  is  interesting  to 
read  even  now.  On  the  part  of  the  Government  the  only 
case  urged  against  Mr.  Ward's  motion  was  that  which 
we  have  already  suggested,  that  the  Government  were 
about  to  issue  a  commission,  that  inquiry  must  follow  in 
any  case,  and  therefore  the  adoption  of  the  motion  was  a 
mere  waste  of  power  and  loss  of  time.  On  the  other 
I 


114  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  1834 

hand,  Lord  Stanley  and  Sir  Robert  Peel  strongly  opposed 
the  motion  on  direct  and  simple  grounds.  Lord  Stanley 
contended,  and  justly,  that  the  adoption  of  such  a  motion 
associated  the  existence  of  the  Irish  State  Church  in 
principle  with  the  proportion  of  representation  which  it 
had  in  the  community.  He  contended,  and  justly,  that 
by  admitting  Mr.  Ward's  motion  Parliament  claimed  for 
itself  the  right  to  abolish  a  State  Church  in  Ireland  al- 
together, if  the  proportion  of  its  worshippers  were  greatly 
below  that  of  the  rest  of  the  community.  He  contended 
that,  according  to  the  principle  of  a  State  Church,  it  did 
not  matter  how  few  were  the  worshippers :  he  urged,  in- 
deed, that  the  fewer  there  were,  the  more  necessity  there 
was  for  such  an  institution.  What,  he  asked,  is  there  in 
our  Parliamentary  system  which,  if  this  resolution  were 
passed,  would  not  leave  the  Go\ernment  open  to  esta- 
blish a  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  Ireland  if  they  thought 
fit?  Of  course  the  answer  to  this  is  plain.  As  long  as 
the  Imperial  Government  recognises  the  Protestant 
as  the  State  religion,  it  is  certain  that  it  will  not  establish 
a  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  Ireland.  On  the  other 
hand  it  is  equally  certain  that  if  the  majority  of  the 
English  people  were  Roman  Catholics,  and  wereinchned 
to  maintain  a  State  Church,  they  would  establish  a 
Catholic  Church.  We  cannot  have  the  same  State 
Church  resting  on  the  principle  of  a  majority  in  England 
and  on  the  principle  of  a  minority  in  Ireland.  But  Lord 
Stanley  was  right  in  saying  that  the  moment  we  recognise 
the  supremacy  of  numbers  at  all  we  foredoom  an  institu- 
tion like  the  State  Church  in  Ireland.  Sir  Robert  Peel 
dwelt  strongly  on  that  feeblest  of  all  arguments  (so  feeble 
that  it  seems  at  this  distance  of  time  a  marvel  to  find 
it  put  forward  by  so  great  a  statesman),  the  argument  that 
Uie  Catholics  had  pledged  themselves  at  the  time  of  their 


1834  The  Government  Commission.  115 

emancipation,  from  the  lips  of  Grattan,  and  even  in  the 
preambles  of  Acts  of  Parliament,  not  to  ask  for  any 
measure  which  could  affect  the  Established  Church  in 
Ireland.  It  seems  marvellous  how  such  a  man  could 
have  relied  on  such  an  argument,  or  could  have  assumed 
that  it  was  in  the  power  of  one  generation  of  men  to  bind 
their  successors  to  a  surrender  of  any  fair  and  legitimate 
claims.  Of  course  when  a  generation  of  men  are  seek- 
ing some  right  which  they  greatly  desire  to  have,  they  are 
ready  enough  to  undertake  that  if  they  get  this  they  will 
ask  for  no  more.  The  mere  fact  that  such  a  promise  is 
made  is  more  discreditable  to  those  who  accept  than  to 
those  who  make  it.  It  can  hardly  be  serious  in  the 
mouths  of  those  who  make  it  or  in  the  minds  of  those 
who  receive  it.  The  argument  had  been  torn  to  pieces 
by  Sydney  Smith  and  by  other  authors,  even  before  Sir 
Robert  Peel  put  it  forward  thus  gravely  again.  O'Connell 
spoke  in  the  debate,  and  spoke  with  robust  good  sense  as 
well  as  with  eloquence.  He  especially  cautioned  the 
Government  against  refusing  justice  to  the  Irish  people 
and  so  driving  them  into  despair,  and  into  that  conspiracy 
which  he  truly  said  was  the  natural  offspring  of  despair. 
The  House  divided  after  a  long  debate  on  the  issue  that 
the  question  be  now  put.  One  hundred  and  twenty  mem- 
bers voted  in  favour  of  putting  Mr.  Ward's  resolution  to 
the  vote  and  369  against  it.  A  majority  of  276  declared, 
tlj0r<5lore,  that  the  motion  was  not  to  be  put. 
^ —  The  House  hastened  to  adopt  the  suggestion  of  the 
Government  for  the  issue  of  a  commission.  A  puzzled 
Government  always  falls  back  on  the  appointment  of  a 
commission.  Lord  Stanley  tried  in  vain  to  oppose  this 
compromise,  and  to  show  that  even  the  appointment  of 
a  commission  involved  a  principle  destructive  of  the  very 
existence  of  the  Established  Church.     He  found  little 


ii6  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  1834 

support  for  this  extreme  view  among  the  more  sensible 
members  of  the  Tory  party.  Sir  Robert  Peel  himself 
was  quite  willing  to  consider  the  propriety  and  feasibility 
of  redistributing  the  property  of  the  Church.  So  far  did 
Peel  go  in  this  direction,  that  it  was  snecringly  suggested 
that  he  ought  to  have  succeeded  to  the  place  in  the 
Whig  Government  vacated  by  Lord  Stanley.  As  a 
matter  of  expediency  and  of  compromise,  Sir  Robert  Peel 
was  undoubtedly  right ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  view 
of  Lord  Stanley  was  sound  and  prophetic  as  regards  the 
fate  of  the  Established  Church  in  Ireland.  It  is  not  true 
that  the  appointment  of  a  commission  involved  a  princi- 
ple destructive  of  the  very  existence  of  an  Established 
Church,  that  is  of  any  Established  Church.  The  right 
of  the  State  to  redistribute  the  revenues  and  reorganise 
the  system  of  an  Established  Church  in  a  country 
whose  religious  opinions  it  fairly  and  fully  represent- 
ed would  by  no  means  involve  any  principle  fatal 
to  its  existence.  But  in  a  country  where  five  out  of 
every  six  of  the  people  were  resolutely  opposed  to  the 
teachings  of  the  State  Church,  and  could  never,  under 
any  conditions,  be  brought  to  cross  the  threshold  of  one 
of  its  Church  buildings,  the  moment  inquiry  set  in  as  to 
the  appropriation  of  its  revenues  and  the  right  of  the 
State  to  redistribute  them,  then  indeed,  as  Lord  Stanley 
contended,  the  principle  was  admitted  which  must  inevit- 
ably lead  to  its  destruction.  Thirty-five  years  later  the 
principle  which  the  House  of  Commons  adopted  when 
they  accepted  the  compromise  suggested  by  Lord  Broug- 
ham, was  pushed  to  its  legitimate  conclusion  in  the  famous 
suspensory  resolutions  introduced  by  Mr.  Gladstone  when 
in  opposition,  and  the  schemes  for  the  disestablishment 
and  disendowment  of  the  Irish  Church  which  he  carried 
through  when  in  office. 


1834  The  New  Parliament  117 

There  was  fresh  effort  at  tithe  compromises,  and  the 
Government  got  into  trouble  about  the  renewal  of  an 
Irish  Coercion  Act.  Tired  of  political  life,  glad  of  any 
excuse  to  escape  from  it.  Lord  Grey  resigned  office,  and 
the  Ministry  was  reorganised,  with  Lord  Melbourne  for 
its  leader.  Few  things  are  more  curious  than  the  con- 
trast between  Lord  Melbourne's  political  character  and 
the  general  character  of  his  administrative  work.  Lord 
Melbourne  cared  little  or  nothing  for  reform.  He  was 
not  interested  in  change  of  any  kind.  He  was  a  genial, 
easy-going,  not  incapable,  man.  The  whole  principle  of 
his  public  life  might  well  enough  be  illustrated  in  his  own 
favourite  remonstrance  with  energetic  reformers  and 
innovators,  "  Can't  you  let  it  alone  ?"  He  would  gladly, 
if  he  could,  have  let  every  proposed  change  alone. 
Things  seemed  to  be  very  well  as  they  were.  In  any 
case  he  was  not  afforded,  just  now,  much  chance  of 
undertaking  important  work.  The  King  had  gradually 
been  turning  more  and  more  against  his  Whig  Ministers, 
because  of  what  he  considered  their  lack  of  firmness  on 
Church  questions.  In  reply  to  an  address  delivered  to 
him  on  his  birthday  by  a  deputation  of  the  Irish  prelates, 
the  King  made  a  speech  filled  with  the  most  earnest 
protestations  of  his  determination  to  maintain  the  Church ; 
a  speech  which  was  in  fact  a  spoken  censure  on  his 
Ministry.  No  one  was  surprised,  therefore,  when  on  the 
occasion  of  a  slight  reconstruction  of  the  administration, 
consequent  on  the  death  of  Lord  Althorp's  father,  which 
raised  Lord  Althorp  to  the  House  of  Lords,  the  King 
bluntly  informed  Lord  Melbourne  that  he  did  not  intend 
to  go  on  with  his  present  Ministers  any  longer.  Sir 
Robert  Peel  was  summoned  from  Rome  to  form  an  ad- 
ministration. Sir  Robert  Peel  undertook  the  task,  but 
thought  it  necessary  to  dissolve  Parliament  and  appeal  to 


ii8  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  1835 

the  country.  The  result  of  the  general  election  brought 
little  comfort  to  the  Tories.  The  Whigs  lost  much  of 
their  overwhelming  power,  but  they  still  remained  strong 
enough  to  command  a  majority  against  the  Government 
on  any  convenient  occasion.  Peel  saw  a  trying  task 
before  him.  Few  tasks  can  be  more  painful  and  humili- 
ating to  a  high-spirited  statesman  than  to  have  tp  try  to 
govern  with  a  minority,  knowing  that  there  is  a  sure 
majority  ready  at  any  moment  to  declare  against  him. 

The  new  Parliament  met  on  February  19,  1835.  The 
opposing  parties  had  a  trial  of  strength  in  the  election 
of  a  Speaker.  The  Government  was  defeated  by  ten 
votes;  316  voted  one  way  and  306  the  other.  Sir  Robert 
Peel,  however,  was  resolved  that  he  would  not  resign  his 
office,  but  struggle  on  as  best  he  could.  He  was  again 
defeated  on  the  moving  of  the  Address,  an  amendment 
being  carried  by  a  majority  of  seven.  Still  he  did  not 
think  he  was  called  upon  to  resign,  considering  the  diffi- 
culties by  which  the  Government  of  every  kind  was  em- 
barrassed just  then.  He  resolved  to  do  the  best  he  could 
to  carry  on  the  administration.  On  March  30,  Lord  John 
Russell  moved  a  resolution  calling  on  the  House  to 
form  itself  into  a  committee  to  consider  the  state  of  the 
Church  Establishment  in  Ireland,  with  the  view  of  ap- 
plying any  surplus  of  the  revenues  not  required  for  the 
spiritual  care  of  its  members  to  the  education  of  all 
classes  of  the  people,  without  distinction  of  religious  de- 
nomination. Sir  Robert  Peel  of  course  strongly  opposed 
the  motion,  and  he  was  supported  by  Lord  Stanley  and 
Sir  James  Graham.  Mr.  O'Connell  spoke  strongly  for 
the  motion.  "  1  shall  content  myself,"  he  said,  "  by 
laying  down  the  broad  principle  that  the  revenues  of  the 
Church  ought  not  to  be  raised  from  a  people  who  do  not 
btJong  to  it."     The  result  of  a  long  debate  was  another 


1 835  Lord  Morpeth*  s  Tithes  Bill.  119 

defeat  of  the  Government;  322  voted  for  the  motion,  and 
289  against  it.  A  new  discussion  on  the  question  of 
Irish  tithes  exposed  the  Ministers  to  yet  another  defeat. 
Sir  Robert  Peel  found  it  impossible  to  continue  in  office 
any  longer.  He  resigned  on  April  8.  An  effort  was 
made  to  induce  Lord  Grey  to  form  an  administration,  but 
Lord  Grey  was  not  to  be  tempted,  and  the  King  was  at 
last  obliged  to  send  for  Lord  Melbourne.  A  few  days 
later  an  administration  was  formed,  Lord  Melbourne  for 
First  Lord  of  the  Treasury,  Lord  Lansdowne  President 
of  the  Council,  Lord  Palmerston  Foreign  Secretary,  Lord 
John  Russell  Home  Secretary,  and  Mr.  Spring-Rice 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer. 

Among  other  members  of  the  new  Government  may 
be  mentioned  Sir  Henry  Parnell,  whose  motion  not  long 
before  had  upset  the  Government  of  the  Duke  of  Wel- 
lington. Sir  J.  C.  Hobhouse,  the  friend  of  Byron,  took 
charge  of  the  India  Department.  Lord  Morpeth  became 
Chief  Secretary  of  the  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland. 

The  new  Government  had  come  into  power  by  de- 
feating their  predecessors  on  the  subject  of  the  Irish 
Church  and  Irish  tithes,  and,  of  course,  they  had  to  un- 
dertake some  sort  of  legislation  in  harmony  with  the 
professions  and  the  policy  which  they  relied  upon  when 
in  opposition.  Accordingly,  on  June  26,  1835,  Lord  Mor- 
peth introduced  a  Tithe  Bill.  Lord  Morpeth  was  the 
eldest  son  of  Lord  Carlisle.  He  was  well  known  in  later 
days  as  one  of  the  most  pleasing  and  popular  Viceroys 
Ireland  ever  had.  He  was  a  man  of  a  certain  graceful 
literary  style,  both  in  writing  and  in  speaking,  of  agree- 
able, kindly  manners,  and  winning  social  ways.  He 
might  have  been  a  successful  Viceroy  if  his  lot  had  been 
cast  in  times  when  genial  good  manners  and  graceful 
accomplishments   were    sufficient    stock-in-trade    for    a 


I20  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  1835 

Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland.  At  the  time,  however,  to 
which  we  now  refer,  he  was  practically  an  untried  states- 
man learning  his  business  in  the  Irish  Office.  His 
Tithes  Bill  was  a  distinct  advance  on  anything  which 
his  predecessors  had  introduced.  Twelve  years  before, 
Mr.  Goulburn  had  introduced  the  principle  of  the  volun- 
tary composition  of  tithes.  Nine  years  later  Mr.  Stanley 
had  made  composition  compulsory.  In  1834  Mr.  Little- 
ton endeavoured  to  convert  the  composition  into  a  rent 
charge.  In  1835  the  Government  proposed  to  convert 
the  tithe  itself  into  a  rent  charge.  All  parties,  therefore, 
had  come  to  an  agreement  that  the  tithe  as  a  burden 
should  be  transferred  from  the  occupier  to  the  owner, 
and  all  too  were  willing  that  the  rent  charge  should  be 
much  smaller  than  the  tithe,  and  that  the  titheowner 
should  sacrifice  some  portion  of  his  income  in  return  for 
the  better  security  he  was  to  have.  Lord  Morpeth  pro- 
posed to  reduce  the  rent  charge  to  a  lower  amount  than 
any  of  his  predecessors.  He  proposed  to  commute  one 
hundred  pounds  of  tithe  for  seventy  pounds  of  rent 
charge.  He  proposed  to  charge  on  the  owner  of  the 
tithes  the  cost  of  collection,  and  to  abandon  to  the  owner 
the  uncollected  arrears  of  tithes  on  the  security  of  which 
the  Government  had  made  liberal  advances  of  money. 
But  his  measure  did  not  stop  with  the  simple  adjustment 
of  tithes.  He  proposed  to  act  on  the  spirit  of  Lord  John 
Russell's  resolution,  and  introduce  certain  appropriation 
clauses,  as  they  were  called,  to  deal  with  the  surplus 
revenues  of  the  Irish  Church.  No  presentation  was  to 
be  made  for  the  time  to  any  benefice  which  did  not  con- 
tain at  least  fifty  members  of  the  Church  of  England. 
But  in  order  to  provide  meanwhile  for  the  religious  ac- 
commodation of  the  members  of  that  Church,  it  was  pro- 
posed that  in  parishes  where  there  was  no  church  the 


1835-38  Rusxell ' s  Tithes  Bill.  1 2 1 

minister  of  the  adjoining  parish  was  to  receive  an  addi- 
tional 5/.  a  year  for  the  cure  of  souls  which  might  be 
supposed  to  exist  in  the  neighbouring  district.  This  Bill 
was  read  a  first  time  on  July  7.  Sir  Robert  Peel  then  at 
once  announced  that  he  approved  of  that  part  of  the  Bill 
which  proposed  to  substitute  a  rent  charge  for  tithes,  but 
to  the  clauses  which  would  appropriate  to  other  purposes 
the  property  of  the  Church  he  was  prepared  to  offer  the 
strongest  opposition.  He  allowed  the  Bill  to  be  read  a 
second  time,  but  he  announced  his  intention  to  move  in 
committee  that  it  be  divided  into  two  parts,  so  that  those 
who  agreed  with  him  in  thinking  the  existing  tithe  sys- 
tem ought  to  be  abolished  would  be  free  to  support  that 
part  of  the  measure  without  assenting  to  the  other  part  of 
it,  which  dealt  with  the  revenues  and  arrangements  of 
the  Church.  When  the  House  went  into  committee.  Sir 
Robert  Peel's  amendment  to  divide  the  Bill  into  two  was 
rejected  by  a  majority  of  319  against  282.  This  majority 
was  not  large  enough  to  bear  down  the  opposition  of  the 
Lords,  and  accordingly,  when  the  Bill  reached  the  Upper 
House  the  Peers  adopted  the  advice  which  Sir  Robert 
Peel  had  given  to  the  Commons.  They  passed  that  part 
of  the  Bill  which  substituted  a  rent  charge  for  tithes,  and 
by  an  enormous  majority  they  struck  out  the  part  which 
dealt  with  the  revenue  of  the  Church.  Lord  Morpeth's 
attempt  therefore  had  come  to  nothing.  The  Bill  was 
withdrawn. 

The  same  difficulty  followed  the  proposed  reform 
through  successive  years.  The  Conservatives  per- 
sistently refused  to  agree  to  any  Bill  which  dealt  with  any 
part  of  the  revenues  of  the  State  Church.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  Government  were  pledged  deeply  and  again 
and  again  to  pass  no  Bill  which  did  not  contain  an  ap- 
propriation clause.     In  1836  Lord  Morpeth  brought  on 


122  The  Irish  Tithe  War.  ^^35-38 

his  measure  again,  but  the  appropriation  clause  was  only 
carried  by  290  votes  against  264.  Naturally  this  gave 
the  Peers  fresh  encouragement.  Once  again  they  muti- 
lated the  Bill.  The  Commons  refused  to  accept  the 
amendments,  and  the  Tithe  Bill  was  a  failure  once  more. 
In  1838  Lord  John  Russell  took  up  the  subject.  He  in- 
troduced a  Bill  based  on  the  principle  which  his  pre- 
decessors had  adopted.  He  proposed  to  convert  the 
tithe  composition  into  a  rent  charge  of  seventy  per  cent, 
of  the  nominal  value  of  the  tithe,  and  to  secure  this  income 
to  existing  incumbents  by  the  guarantee  of  the  State. 
Despite  a  sort  of  promise  given  by  Sir  Robert  Peel 
that  the  conservatives  would  not  oppose  the  measure  if 
it  did  not  contain  a  sweeping  appropriation  clause,  there 
was  a  strong  opposition  made  to  it  by  the  Tories.  Finally, 
Lord  John  Russell  consented  so  far  to  modify  his  pro- 
posal as  to  confine  the  measure  merely  to  a  Bill  con- 
verting the  tithe  composition  into  a  rent  charge.  He 
also  went  so  far  as  to  fix  the  rent  charge  at  seventy-five 
per  cent,  instead  of  seventy,  as  he  had  at  first  proposed. 
They  introduced  clauses  giving  up  the  claim  of  the 
country  to  have  the  great  advance  already  made  to  the 
titheowners  repaid  to  the  nation,  and  they  agreed  to 
devote  a  quarter  of  a  million  of  money  to  the  extinction 
of  the  remaining  arrears.  The  more  advanced  party 
amongst  the  English  Liberals  were  enraged  at  what  they 
called  a  surrender  of  principle.  They  declared  that  the 
very  object  to  maintain  which  Sir  Robert  Peel  had  been 
driven  out  of  office  had  now  been  given  up  by  the  Whig 
administration.  They  insisted  that  Lord  John  Russell's 
Bill  simply  squandered  immense  sums  of  the  national 
money  on  the  Church  of  a  minority.  It  is  plain,  indeed, 
that  the  Bill  which  was  now  passed  was  in  substance  the 
very  measure  which  might  have  been  obtained  with  the 


'S35~38  The  Poor  Laws.  123 

assent  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  in  1835.  The  difficulty  dur- 
ing many  years  had  been  that  which  we  have  already 
described,  the  question  of  appropriation — that  is,  of  se- 
questration of  part  of  the  revenues  of  the  State  Church 
and  interference  with  its  internal  arrangements.  To 
secure  that  principle  the  Whigs  had  stood  out  against  the 
Tories  ;  to  prevent  that  principle  from  being  adopted  in 
legislation  was  for  many  years  the  sole  object  of  the 
Tories.  Both  parties  were  willing  to  agree  on  the  change 
of  the  tithe  into  a  rent  charge,  and  the  Bill  therefore 
which  Lord  John  Russell  passed  in  1838  might  have  been 
passed  many  years  sooner  if  the  Whig  Ministry  could 
have  made  up  their  minds  as  to  the  distance  they  were 
willing  to  go  in  order  to  meet  a  compromise.  Mean- 
while the  agitation  on  Irish  tithes  had  produced  an  agita- 
tion about  English  tithes  as  well.  Many  grievances  ex- 
isted in  England  as  well  as  in  Ireland,  although,  of 
course,  they  were  not  aggravated  in  England  by  the  con- 
tinued and  inevitable  hostility  between  the  State  Church 
and  the  people.  At  the  worst,  in  England,  the  tithe  was 
unfairly  levied  and  badly  appropriated,  but  in  Ireland  it 
was  like  a  humiliating  tribute  exacted  by  the  conqueror 
from  the  conquered.  The  question  was  settled  in 
England  before  its  settlement  in  Ireland.  A  Bill  intro- 
duced in  1836  by  Lord  John  Russell  made  the  commuta- 
tion of  tithes  compulsory,  appointed  commissioners  to 
value  the  tithes  on  an  average  estimate  of  three  crops 
during  the  seven  preceding  years,  and  awarded  to  the 
titheowner  a  commutation  not  less  than  sixty  per  cent, 
and  not  more  than  seventy-five  per  cent,  of  the  nominal 
gross  value  of  the  tithe.  This  measure  was  passed  with 
no  practical  modification.  The  commissioners  soon  suc- 
ceeded in  getting  at  a  rate  of  commutation  for  every 
parish,  and  the  payment  of  tithe  in  kind  came  to  an  end 


124  Poor  Law  and  Municipa  I  Reform.         1834 

in  this  country.  The  effect  of  the  measure  thus  intro- 
duced was  found  in  the  end  to  be  as  satisfactory  to  the 
Church  as  it  was  to  the  tithe  payers.  The  Church  ob- 
tained a  certain  revenue  in  return  for  the  very  uncertain 
and  haphazard  kind  of  collection.  The  owners  and 
occupiers  found  themselves  rid  of  a  very  disagreeable 
and  fluctuating  kind  of  charge,  the  collection  of  which 
was  troublesome,  and  the  effect  of  which  was  very  often 
to  make  the  clergyman  of  the  parish  an  object  of  dis- 
trust and  dislike  much  more  than  of  affection  and  con- 
fidence to  his  parishioners.  But  in  Ireland  the  change 
in  the  system  of  tithe  collecting  was  only  a  small  part  of 
a  great,  a  necessary,  and  an  inevitable  reform,  which, 
although  seen  by  many  even  then  to  be  inevitable,  was 
postponed  and  resisted  for  more  than  a  generation. 


C' 


CHAPTER  IX. 

POOR   LAW  AND   MUNICIPAL   REFORM. 


Much  of  the  misery  of  the  rural  labourer  in  England 
was  to  be  traced  directly  to  the  condition  of  the  poor  law 
system.  The  famous  statute  of  Elizabeth,  which  was 
intended  to  put  a  stop  to  vagrancy  and  mendicancy  and 
to  encourage  industry,  had  been  worked  for  generations 
in  such  a  manner  as  to  foster  pauperism  and  create  quite 
a  disease  of  beggary.  The  laws  of  settlement,  which 
were  intended  merely  to  protect  districts  from  actual 
invasions  of  hordes  of  paupers,  had  practically  put  it  in 
the  power  of  parishes  which  were  rich  to  turn  over  the 
surplus  of  their  labouring  population  on  smaller  and 
poorer  places.  When  the  Reformed  Parliament  came 
into  existence,  Lord  Grey  and  his  colleagues  determined 


1834  Parish  Relief.  135 

to  seek  out  some  cure  for  the  evils  which  were  con- 
stantly increasing.  They  did  what  was  invariably  done 
by  the  Whig  administrations  of  that  time.  They  began 
by  issuing  a  commission.  That  was  a  time  when 
Sydney  Smith  said  that  the  whole  earth  was  put  into 
commission  by  the  Whigs.  In  this  instance  the  com- 
mission was  a  very  important  matter,  and  was  composed 
of  men  well  qualified  for  the  investigation.  The  com- 
mission appointed  assistant  commissioners  to  make  the 
actual  inquiries.  The  result  of  the  investigation  was  to 
show  that  the  poor  law  system  was  administered  almost 
everywhere  in  such  a  manner  as  to  engender  abuses 
even  where  abuses  had  not  previously  existed.  In  many 
places  the  local  tradesmen  and  the  parish  officers  played 
into  each  other's  hands,  as  the  servants  and  the  trades- 
men of  a  nobleman  might  be  supposed  to  do.  The 
tradesmen  overcharged  for  every  article  they  supplied  to 
the  parochial  authorities,  and  the  parish  officers  were 
bribed  to  assist  them  in  this  system  of  extortion.  The 
poor  rates  were  openly  made  use  of  for  the  purpose  of 
bribing  the  holders  of  the  franchise.  But  probably  worse 
than  all  this  was  the  manner  in  which  the  system  en- 
couraged and  promoted  pauperism.  The  pauper  in  the 
workhouse  was  well  fed,  and  too  well  fed,  at  the  expense 
of  the  poor  ratepayer,  who,  sometimes  but  one  degree 
above  the  level  of  pauperism,  was  too  independent  to  eat 
the  bread  of  beggary  while  he  could  maintain  himself 
and  his  family  by  any  amount  of  incessant  and  hopeless 
labour.  When  a  person  had  once  taken  poor-house 
relief  it  became  a  sort  of  property  or  inheritance.  Once 
in  the  family  it  never  got  out  of  the  family.  Generations 
of  paupers  bequeathed  to  the  country  new  generations  of 
raupers.  The  character  of  a  recipient  was  not  held  to 
be  any  reason  for  denying  relief.     He  might  be  a  well- 


126  Poor  Law  and  Municipal  Reform.  1834 

known  thief.  She  might  be  a  well-known  prostitute.  In 
either  case  the  relief  was  given  just  when  it  was  asked 
for.  A  father  spent  all  his  wages  in  drink,  and  came  to 
get  relief  for  his  family  when  there  was  nothing  to  give 
them  at  home.  In  some  places  whole  populations  were 
turned  into  paupers.  People  lived  on  the  relief  given  by 
the  workhouse  rather  than  on  wages.  Workhouse  sup- 
port was  constantly  given  in  relief  of  wages.  A  farmer 
dismissed  his  labourers  because  he  did  not  care  to  pay 
them  the  market  price  ot  labour ;  they  at  once  became 
paupers ;  they  received  a  certain  contribution  from  the 
parish  and  then  the  farmer  took  them  back  and  gave 
them  employment  at  lower  wages  than  before,  so  that 
in  point  of  fact  the  local  taxation  became  a  sort  of  rate 
in  aid  of  the  farmers.  In  some  places  the  manufacturers 
followed  the  example  of  the  farmers,  discharged  their 
workpeople,  and  allowed  them  to  become  paupers  in  the 
receipt  of  parish  relief,  well  knowing  that  when  once 
they  had  begun  to  receive  that  relief  no  workhouse  offi- 
cial would  ever  challenge  their  right  to  the  continuance 
of  the  dole.  They  then  re-employed  them  at  much  lower 
rates,  and  so  received  a  subsidy  from  the  parochial  funds 
in  aid  of  their  business.  It  has  been  distinctly  stated 
that  the  commissioners  found  many  cases  in  which  men 
spent  their  wages  as  rapidly  as  they  could,  in  drink  or  in 
amusement,  in  order  that  they  might  be  able  to  say  they 
had  actually  nothing  and  so  be  entitled  to  get  their 
names  on  the  workhouse  list.  In  fact,  to  have  one's 
name  put  down  as  a  recipient  of  workhouse  relief  was 
like  having  it  put  down  on  a  pension  list.  Once  put 
down  it  was  not  supposed  that  it  would  be  taken  off  again 
unless  at  the  request  of  the  recipient  himself.  The  re- 
lieving-officer's  book  was  to  the  low  class  ne'er-do-well 
what  the  pension  list  was  to  his  aristocratic  fellow.     It 


1834  The  Poor  Law  Commission.  127 

seems  almost  needless  to  say  that  such  a  system  encour- 
aged early  improvidence  and  reckless  marriages.  A  man 
might  as  well  marry  as  not,  for  he  received  relief,  his 
wife  would  receive  relief,  and  as  his  children  began  to 
grow  up  they  would  come  in  for  their  share  of  the 
general  subsidy.  The  evil  had  grown  so  great  that  some 
eminent  reformers  were  positively  of  opinion  that  the 
only  remedy  would  be  the  entire  abolition  of  the  poor 
laws,  leaving  the  relief  of  genuine  pauperism  to  the 
operation  of  private  benevolence,  energy,  and  super- 
vision. 

The  commissioners,  however,  were  not  of  opinion 
that  so  sweeping  a  remedy  could  be  attempted.  They 
held  that  the  principle  of  public  relief  was  that  a  certain 
provision  should  be  made  for  that  surplus,  or  residuum 
as  it  may  be  called,  of  every  population,  the  infirm  and 
the  aged  who  have  no  friends  to  support  them  ;  for  those 
who,  under  some  temporary  pressure,  cannot  obtain 
work,  however  willing  to  take  it;  and  likewise,  it  may  be 
added,  for  those  who  even  by  their  idleness  or  miscon- 
duct had  brought  themselves  into  such  a  condition,  that  if 
not  fed  for  a  time  at  the  public  expense,  they  needs  must 
commit  actual  crime  or  else  lie  down  and  starve.  The 
principal  recommendations  of  the  commissioners  were 
based  on  the  principle  that  the  then  existing  system  of 
poor  laws  was  "  destructive  to  the  industry,  forethought, 
and  honesty  of  the  labourers,  to  the  wealth  and  morality 
of  theemployersof  labour  andtheownersofproperty.and 
to  the  mutual  goodwill  and  happiness  of  all."  The  com- 
missioners declared  that  the  system  "collects  and  chairs 
down  the  labourers  in  masses,  without  any  reference  to 
the  demand  for  their  labour;  that  while  it  increases  their 
numbers  it  impairs  the  means  by  whjch  the^und  for  theii 
subsistence  is  to  be  reproduced,  and  impairs  the  motives 


128  Poor  Law  and  Municipal  Reform.         1834 

for  using  those  means  which  it  suffers  to  exist ;  and  that 
every  year  and  every  day  these  evils  are  becoming  more 
overwhelming  in  magnitude  and  less  susceptible  of  cure." 
The  evils,  they  held,  might  be  at  least  diminished  by  the 
combination  of  workhouses,  and  by  a  rigid  administra- 
tion and  practical  management  instead  of  the  existing 
"  neglect,  extravagance,  robber)',  and  fraud."  An  altera- 
tion or  abolition  of  the  law  of  settlement  might,  the 
commissioners  thought,  save  a  great  part  or  the  whole  of 
the  enormous  sums  now  spent  in  litigation  and  in  re- 
movals, and  allow  the  labourers  to  be  distributed  accord- 
ing to  the  demand  for  labour.  They  suggested  that  no 
relief  should  be  given  to  the  able-bodied  or  to  their 
families  except  in  return  for  adequate  labour,  or  in  a  well 
regulated  workhouse ;  that  thereby  a  broad  line  would 
be  drawn  between  the  independent  labourers  and  the 
paupers;  that  the  number  of  paupers  would  be  imme- 
diately diminished  in  consequence  of  the  reluctance  of 
persons  to  accept  relief  on  such  terms ;  and  that  pauper- 
ism would  in  the  end,  instead  of  forming  a  constantly  in- 
creasing proportion  of  the  population,  become  a  small 
and  well-defined  part  of  it,  capable  of  being  provided  for 
at  less  than  half  the  amount  of  the  existing  poor  rates. 
Finally,  the  commissioners  recommended  that  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  poor  laws  should  be  entrusted  to  the 
general  superintendence  of  one  central  authority  with 
extensive  powers. 

A  Bill  framed  on  these  recommendations  and  em- 
bodying them  as  nearly  as  possible,  was  introduced  into 
Parliament.  It  naturally  created  a  very  strong  opposition. 
There  was  everything  in  the  proposed  measure  which 
could  raise  up  against  it  all  the  sentimental  feelings  that 
tend  to  foster  and  cherish  pauperism.  Beggary  had  been 
so  long  an  institut  jn  of  the  country  that  many  persons 


1835  The  Municipal  Corporations.  129 

had  come  to  regard  it  with  a  sort  of  kindly  feeling,  and 
had  been  accustomed  to  think  that  the  relation  between 
the  mendicant  and  the  donor  was  of  a  mutually  improv- 
ing kind,  something  like  that  between  a  good  master 
and  a  faithful  servant.  All  that  sort  of  easy  benevolence 
by  which  we  each  of  us  feel  inspired  now  and  then 
when  we  are  inclined  to  throw  coppers  among  whining 
beggars  in  the  street,  raised  itself  in  opposition  to  the 
somewhat  stringent  policy  of  the  Government.  The 
measure  was,  however,  passed  almost  in  its  mtegrity 
through  both  Houses.  The  Duke  of  Wellington  was 
liberr.l  enough  to  give  it  his  strong  support,  and  to  pro- 
test agfainst  the  efforts  of  some  of  his  own  party  in  the 
House  of  Lords  to  oppose  the  Bill,  in  consequence  of  the 
lateness  of  the  period  at  which  it  was  introduced.  It 
was  carried  into  law,  and  we  believe  we  may  safely  state 
that  on  the  whole  the  hopes  with  which  it  was  introduced 
have  been  well-sustained  and  the  prophecies  of  evil  have 
come  to  nothing.  Many  and  various  defects  indeed  have 
been  found  since  that  time  and  still  exist  in  the  working 
of  the  poor  law.  Many  changes  have  been  made  which 
deviate  a  good  deal  from  the  rigid  principle  of  self- 
dependence  on  which  it  was  introduced.  The  adminis- 
tration of  outdoor  relief  in  large  towns  is  still  a  source  of 
much  corruption  and  demoralisation.  But  it  would  be 
hardly  possible  to  administer  such  a  system  with  any 
regard  to  mercy,  not  to  say  generosity,  and  not  at  the 
same  time  to  open  the  door  to  fraud  and  to  depravity. 
In  great  towns  it  very  often  happens  that  the  poor  law 
officials,  acting  sternly  in  some  particular  case  where 
they  suppose  relief  is  not  really  needed,  make  a  complete 
mistake  and  deny  assistance  exactly  where  it  is  most 
imperatively  required.  Some  poor  creature  dies  at  the 
door  of  a  workhouse  to  which  he  or  she  has  just  been 
K 


130  Poor  Law  and  Municipal  Reform.  1835 

refused  admission.  Some  old  woman  sends  a  pathetic 
appeal  to  the  relieving  officers  ;  they  disbelieve  her  story 
or  neglect  the  appeal,  and  after  a  while  she  is  found  by 
her  neighbours  dead  from  sheer  starvation  in  her  miser- 
able garret.  Then  a  natural  outcry  is  raised  by  the 
public.  The  feelings  of  every  humane  person  are 
touched  and  the  impression  goes  abroad  that  the  work- 
house officials  are  hardened  against  all  sense  of  pity.  A 
relaxation  in  their  system  naturally  takes  place,  and  for 
a  while  outdoor  relief  is  heedlessly  given  to  almost  any- 
one who  asks  for  it.  These,  however,  are  only  some  of 
the  casual  defects  of  a  system  which  by  its  very  nature 
could  hardly  be  so  administered  as  not  to  fall  into  error 
every  now  and  then.  No  one,  we  believe,  will  deny  that 
on  the  whole  the  change  in  the  poor  law  system  made 
by  Lord  Grey's  Government  was  wise  and  just,  and  has 
been  attended  with  results  even  more  satisfactory  than 
those  which  its  promoters  might  at  one  time  have  felt 
themselves  entitled  to  expect. 

In  1835  Lord  Melbourne's  Government  just  settled 
firmly  in  office,  took  on  themselves  the  task  of  reform- 
ing the  whole  system  of  municipal  corporations.  Lord 
John  Russell  had  charge  of  the  Bill  which  was  to  accom- 
plish this  object.  The  reform  of  the  municipal  corpora- 
tions was  a  necessary  sequel  to  the  reform  of  the  House 
of  Commons  itself.  Petitions  for  reform  had  been  pour- 
ing in  from  all  manner  of  places,  and  Lord  Althorp 
some  years  before  had  moved  for  a  select  committee  to 
inquire  into  the  state  of  municipal  corporations  in  Eng- 
land and  Ireland  and  Wales.  Scotland  was  not  inclu- 
ded within  the  terms  of  the  Inquiry,  because  it  was 
understood  that  Lord  Jeffrey,  as  Lord  Advocate,  would 
undertake  to  deal  with  the  Scotch  boroughs  himself. 
The  committee   recommended    the  appointment  of  a 


1835  Municipal  Corruption.  131 

commission  capable  of  making  inquiries  locally  into  the 
state  of  each  separate  corporation.  The  inquiry  began 
in  1833,  and  was  not  finished  until  after  the  opening  of 
Parliament  in  1835.  The  Report  was  a  very  interesting 
contribution  to  history.  It  traced  the  whole  growth  of 
the  municipal  corporation  in  this  country.  It  showed 
how  the  institution  began  by  the  collecting  together  of  a 
few  men  within  a  certain  limited  space,  in  order  to  carry 
on  in  security  the  humble  trades  by  which  they  lived. 
All  around  them  the  great  majority  of  their  fellow-coun- 
trymen were  the  mere  serfs  of  the  local  landlord.  The 
traders  found  that  a  mere  serf  who  had  no  rights  of  per- 
son or  property  which  his  landlord  was  bound  to  respect, 
could  not  with  success  carry  on  any  trade  or  business. 
They  therefore  refused  to  admit  the  claims  of  the  local 
magnate,  and  insisted  on  their  right  to  personal  freedom. 
Little  colonies,  brought  together  for  the  purposes  of 
trade,  became  established  in  various  parts  of  England, 
and  were  the  first  centres  of  personal  and  political  lib- 
erty there.  The  man  who  had  once  proclaimed  himself 
free,  claimed  the  same  right  for  his  descendants.  Not 
only  that,  but  it  was  a  condition  of  almost  all  these 
free  settlements,  that  one  who  married  a  freeman's 
daughter  should  himself  become  a  freeman.  One  who 
served  an  apprenticeship  to  trade  became  as  free  as  his 
master  when  his  time  was  out.  When  the  traders  thus 
formed  themselves  into  little  communities,  they  found  it 
necessary  to  meet  occasionally  and  talk  over  common 
measures.  In  time  it  was  found  that  large  public  meet- 
ings could  not  serve  the  purpose,  and  so  the  affairs  of 
each  locality  were  entrusted  to  committees,  and  these 
committees  gradually  grew  into  what  we  now  call  local 
corporations. 

Some  of   the    English    Sovereigns    were    especially 


132  Poor  Law  and  Municipal  Reform.  1835 

anxious  to  conciliate  the  traders,  who  had  the  means  of 
assisting  them  in  many  ways.  The  Tudor  monarchs 
began  to  grant  charters  of  incorporation  to  certain  of 
these  communities.  In  some  cases  the  whole  bulk  of 
the  resident  freemen  formed  the  corporation,  but  in  a 
greater  number  of  cases  only  a  small  and  chosen  body 
was  constituted  a  municipality.  After  a  while  it  was 
understood  that  the  corporations  consisted  only  of  the 
ruling  body.  The  government  of  a  corporation  was 
generally  vested  in  a  chief  magistrate  and  a  town  coun- 
cil. In  many  small  places  the  mayor  had  the  authority 
almost  entirely  in  his  own  hands,  and  not  uncommonly 
dispensed  as  he  pleased  the  revenues  of  the  munici- 
pality. After  a  while  corruption  began  to  creep  into 
many  of  these  institutions.  Most  of  the  town  councils 
were  self-elected,  and  the  members  held  their  seats  for 
life.  They  spent  their  funds  as  they  pleased.  They  in- 
creased the  salary  of  officers  who  had  nothing  to  do. 
They  lavished  money  on  entertainments  to  themselves 
and  their  friends.  They  let  out  the  property  of  the 
borough  to  their  own  members  at  merely  nominal  rents. 
They  made  every  possible  use  of  their  position  and  their 
power  to  promote  the  success  of  the  political  party  to 
which  the  majority  happened  to  belong.  Customs,  tolls, 
or  dues,  which  they  were  chartered  to  collect  for  public 
purposes,  were  in  some  cases  coolly  converted  by  the 
corporations  into  private  property.  The  corporations 
had  all  varieties  of  jurisdiction.  They  had  local  courts 
of  the  most  Tarious  authority.  In  some  large  towns  their 
local  courts  were  not  empowered  to  try  any  case  of  felo- 
ny. In  one  or  two  very  small  places  they  had,  on  the 
contrary,  the  right  to  try  capital  cases,  and  even  to  pro- 
nounce the  capital  sentence.  They  had  recorders  in 
most  cases  to  try  criminal  cases,  but  the  recorder  was 


1835  Jiusseirs  '*  Gigantic  Innovation."  133 

not  always  a  lawyer.  In  some  places  the  recorder  al- 
lowed twenty  years  or  more  to  pass  without  taking  the 
trouble  to  visit  the  seat  of  his  local  authority.  In  his 
absence  the  town  clerk  or  somebody  else  tried  the  cases, 
and  it  occasionally  happened  that  the  town  clerk,  or 
other  sub-deputy  who  acted  in  this  capacity,  was  called 
upon  to  act  as  judge  in  some  case  which  nearly  con- 
cerned the  interests,  if  not  of  himself,  at  least  of  some 
member  of  his  family,  or  some  partner  in  business. 

Both  the  great  English  political  parties  made  use  of 
the  corporations,  and  with  about  equal  recklessness,  in 
order  to  promote  their  political  interests.  When  Lord 
John  Russell  made  an  attack  on  the  manner  in  which 
the  Tory  party  had  used  their  influence  over  certain 
rotten  corporations.  Sir  Robert  Peel  retorted  by  de- 
scribing the  case  of  the  corporation  of  Derby.  In  Der- 
by, Peel  stated,  that  whenever  the  Whigs  thought  that 
the  number  of  freemen  in  their  interest  was  getting  low, 
the  mayor  or  some  other  leading  member  of  the  corpora- 
tion applied  to  the  agents  of  the  Cavendish  family,  and  re- 
quested a  list  of  the  names  of  persons  who  might  be  ad- 
mitted as  honorary  freemen.  He  also  stated  that  on  the 
last  occasion  when  this  application  was  made,  thehonor- 
ary  freemen  were  almost  all  of  them  tenants  of  the  Duke 
of  Devonshire,  and  the  fees  on  their  admission  were  paid 
by  the  Duke's  agents.  Indeed,  it  is  hardly  necessary  to 
point  out  that  such  a  complicated,  heterogeneous,  and 
irresponsible  system  as  that  on  which  most  of  the  cor- 
porations were  founded  must  necessarily  lead  to  corrup- 
tion. Where  bodies  of  men  are  self-elected,  where  they 
are  empowered,  or  at  least  empower  themselves,  to  ad- 
minister without  responsibility  the  revenues  collected  for 
public  purposes  and  the  property  which  belongs  to  the 
public ;   where  they  can  obtain   exclusive  commercial 


134  Poor  Law  and  Mumcipal  Reform.  1 835 

and  trading  privileges,  and  assert  for  themselves  the 
jright  to  put  in  use  the  most  various  judicial  authority  ; 
'and  where,  in  addition,  they  can  make  themselves  politi- 
cal engines,  and  assist  in  every  way  the  political  party 
whose  interests  they  desire  to  forward,  it  is  not  necessary 
io  say  that  political  and  social  corruption  must  be  the 
inevitable  result. 

The  Whig  Government  determined  to  deal  resolutely 
with  these  abuses.  Lord  John  Russell,  now  leader  of 
the  House  of  Commons,  introduced  his  Bill  on  June  5, 
1835.  He  proposed  that  it  should  apply  to  183  boroughs 
not  including  the  Metropolis,  and  containing  an  aggre- 
gate population  of  two  millions  of  people,  or  an  average 
of  eleven  thousand  persons  in  each  borough.  In  most 
cases  he  designed  that  the  boundary  of  the  parliamentary 
borough  should  be  the  boundary  of  the  municipal  borough 
likewise,  and  in  a  few  cases  the  Crown  was  to  have  the 
right  of  defining  the  municipal  borough.  The  governing 
body  was  to  consist  of  a  mayor  and  a  council,  and  the 
councillors  were  to  be  elected  by  resident  ratepayers. 
Twenty  of  the  largest  boroughs  were  to  be  divided  into 
wards,  and  a  certain  number  of  councillors  were  to  be 
elected  by  each  ward.  The  rights  of  existing  freemen 
were  to  be  maintained,  but  as  the  freemen  gradually  died 
out  the  rights  were  to  be  extinguished.  Exclusive  trading 
privileges  were  to  be  abolished.  The  management  of  the 
charitable  funds  was  to  be  entrusted  to  bodies  chosen 
not  from  the  council  but  from  the  ratepayers  at  large. 
The  Crown  was  to  nominate  a  recorder  for  each  borough 
which  was  willing  to  provide  a  proper  salary  for  the 
office,  but  the  recorder  was  always  to  be  a  barrister  of  at 
least  five,  years'  standing.  This  seems  to  us  now  a  very 
moderate  measure  of  reform.  It  left  a  great  many  ano- 
malies and  abuses  untouched.     But  at  the  time  of  the 


183s  Freemen.  135 

introduction  of  the  measure  it  was  thought  a  most  auda- 
cious attempt.  It  was  regarded,  to  adopt  a  phrase  that 
afterwards  became  famous  in  politics,  as  "a  gigantic 
innovation.'' 

Sir  Robert  Peel  followed  Lord  John  Russell.  He 
made  a  remarkable  speech.  He  did  not  oppose  the  in- 
troduction of  the  Bill.  On  the  contrary,  he  acknow- 
ledged the  necessity  for  some  sort  of  legislation  on  the 
subject,  but  he  took  advantage  of  the  opportunity  to  find 
some  fault  with  the  Government  scheme,  and  to  make 
known  once  for  all  his  own  opinion  with  regard  to  muni- 
cipal reform.  It  was  clear  that  he  had  no  intention  of 
acting  the  part  of  an  obstructionist  in  regard  to  such 
legislation.  He  advised  all  members  of  corporations  to 
concur  readily  in  the  amendment  of  the  existing  system, 
but  on  the  express  condition  that  there  was  to  be  a  real 
and  genuine  reform,  and  that  the  occasion  was  not  to  be 
made  a  mere  pretext  for  transforming  power  from  one 
party  in  the  State  to  another.  What  the  country  wanted, 
he  declared,  was  a  good  system  of  municipal  govern- 
ment, taking  security,  as  far  as  security  could  be  taken, 
that  a  really  intelligent  and  respectable  portion  of  the 
community  of  each  town  should  be  called  to  administer 
its  municipal  afifairs,  and  that  the  future  application  of 
the  charitable  or  corporate  funds  should  never  be  diverted 
to  any  other  than  charitable  and  corporate  purposes. 
Sir  Robert  Peel  was  not  unreasonable  in  the  fear  which 
he  expressed  as  to  the  possibility  of  municipal  reform 
being  made  the  means  of  advancing  the  interests  of  one 
party.  At  that  time  we  are  afraid  that  few  public  men 
had  entirely  emerged  from  the  condition  of  political 
development  which  makes  it  seem  fair  to  take  advan- 
tage of  such  an  opportunity  for  such  a  purpose.  Mr. 
O'Connell  expressed  his  approval  of  the  measure,  but 


X36  Poor  Law  and  Municipal  Reform,         1835 

said  that  the  title  of  the  Bill  wanted  one  word  which 
greatly  diminished  its  value ;  it  was  called  a  Bill  for  the 
better  regulation  of  Municipal  Corporations  in  England 
and  Wales.  The  word  he  wished  to  see  introduced  was 
"  Ireland."  It  was  shortly  after  stated  that  the  Govern- 
ment intended  to  bring  forward  a  Bill  for  Ireland  ot 
much  the  same  nature  as  that  for  England  and  Wales, 

The  Bill  was  read  a  second  time  on  June  1 5,  without 
a  division,  and  was  in  committee  for  not  quite  a  month. 
The  Conservative  party  had  begun  to  understand  that 
mere  obstruction  is  of  little  use  when  a  strong  force  of 
public  opinion  is  behind  those  who  introduce  a  measure. 
It  is  also  right  to  say  that  the  opposition  was  very  much 
mitigated  by  the  conduct  of  Sir  Robert  Peel,  who  set 
himself  to  work  sincerely  to  make  a  good  measure  of 
municipal  reform  out  of  the  Government  scheme,  and 
did  his  best  to  prevent  anything  like  unnecessary  resist- 
ance. The  chief  objection  which  the  Conservative  party 
raised  was  to  the  clause  which  declared  that  after  the 
passing  of  the  Act  no  person  should  be  elected  a  citizen, 
freeman,  liveryman,  or  burgess  of  any  borough  in  respect 
of  any  right  and  title  other  than  that  of  occupancy  and 
payment  of  rates  within  the  borough.  The  object  of  this 
clause  was  to  get  rid  of  the  system  which  allowed  the 
freedom  of  a  borough,  and  with  it  the  parliamentary  and 
municipal  franchise,  to  be  acquired  by  birth,  apprentice- 
ship, purchase,  marriage,  or  the  favour  of  the  corporation. 
These  honorary  freemen,  as  we  may  call  them,  had  valu- 
able privileges  in  many  boroughs.  They  had  rights  of 
pasturage,  or  a  share  in  the  commons  near  the  towns, 
and  of  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  of  common  land,  if  there 
should  be  any  sold.  In  other  places  they  had  the  privi- 
lege to  enter  free  of  toll  in  any  fair  or  market.  In  others 
they  shared  in  the  monopoly  of  trade  which  was  enjoyed 


1 835  ^'  Lords  and  the  Bill.  137 

by  the  resident  freemen  generally.  An  amendment  was 
moved  by  Sir  William  Follett,  for  the  purpose  of  pre- 
serving the  franchise  for  the  freemen.  Lord  Grey  had 
very  imwillingly  allowed  existing  freemen  to  retain  the 
parliamentary  franchise,  and  the  clause  in  the  Municipal 
Reform  Bill  would  put  an  end  to  the  future  admission  of 
freemen  to  that  privilege.  Sir  William  Follett  insisted 
therefore  that  the  clause  was  really  a  new  measure  of 
political  reform,  and  contended  that  the  Government 
had  already  pledged  themselves  that  their  Reform  Act 
of  1832  was  final.  It  was  argued,  with  perhaps  more 
show  of  justice,  that  if  the  freemen  were  to  be  deprived 
of  the  privilege  which  the  Reform  Bill  allowed  them  to 
retain,  it  should  be  done  by  a  separate  Act  of  Parliament 
and  not  be  brought  in  casually  as  a  mere  chance  result 
of  the  reorganization  of  the  municipalities.  The  argu- 
ment, however,  of  the  Government  and  its  supporters 
against  the  whole  system  was  clear  and  direct.  The 
freemen  were  not  necessarily  residents  of  the  borough 
or  ratepayers.  They  had  no  natural  interest  in  its  affairs 
or  in  its  prosperity,  and  they  were  not  open  to  the  con- 
trol of  its  public  opinion.  They  regarded  their  privilege 
in  many  cases  merely  as  something  to  be  sold.  There 
was  no  reason  why  a  man  who  had  been  in  prison  might 
not  give  a  vote  as  well  as  the  most  respectable  citizen. 
It  would  be  impossible  to  reform  any  municipality  if 
this  class  of  persons  were  still  to  be  allowed  the  control 
of  its  affairs.  On  the  other  hand,  if  they  were  unfit  to 
exercise  the  municipal  franchise,  with  what  show  of  reason 
could  the  Government  allow  them  the  right  to  vote  for 
members  of  Parliament  ?  The  amendment,  and  others 
having  the  same  object  in  view,  were  rejected.  Mr. 
Molesworth,  in  his  "  History  of  England,"  points  out 
that  the  Bill  had  "one  most  valuable,  though  indirect, 


1 38  Poor  Law  and  Municipal  Reform,         1835 

effect,"  which  was  not  contemplated  perhaps  by  its  au- 
thors. "By  putting  an  end,"  he  says,  "to  the  rights  of 
apprenticeship  and  exclusive  trading,  it  struck  off  one 
fetter  on  industry,  as  the  poor  law,  in  dealing  with  set- 
tlements, had  struck  off  another.  Both  of  them,  by  pre- 
venting men  from  trading  or  working  where  they  would, 
interfered  most  mischievously  with  the  freedom  of  la- 
bour." 

Sir  Robert  Peel  proposed  that  in  the  case  of  the  larger 
boroughs,  members  of  the  governing  body  should  be  re- 
quired to  have  personal  property  to  the  value  of  1,000/., 
or  to  be  rated  on  a  rental  of  not  less  than  40/.  a  year,  and 
that  in  the  smaller  boroughs  the  qualifications  should  be 
a  property  of  500/.,  or  a  rated  rental  of  20/.  a  year.  This 
proposal,  too,  was  rejected,  and  was,  indeed,  in  direct 
opposition  to  the  spirit  and  purpose  of  the  Bill.  Mr. 
Grote  took  advantage  of  the  opportuni'y  to  move  that 
the  ballot  be  employed  in  municipal  elections.  It  is 
almost  needless  to  say  that  hewas  unsuccessful.  Nearly 
forty  years  more  had  to  pass  away,  and  the  country  had 
to  go  through  an  unspeakable  amount  of  political  and 
municipal  corruption  and  degradation,  before  the  mind 
of  England  could  be  brought  to  perceive  the  value  of  the 
system  for  which  the  historian  of  Greece  pleaded  so 
patiently  and  so  long.  The  Bill  was  sent  up  to  the 
House  of  Lords  on  July  2i,  without  any  material  change 
in  its  character.  The  majority  there  were,  of  course, 
opposed  to  it.  They  had  not  the  courage  to  reject  it, 
especially  after  the  stand  which  had  been  taken  by  Sir 
Robert  Peel,  but  they  determined  to  mutilate  and  mangle 
it  as  much  as  they  thought  it  would  be  safe  to  attempt. 
The  speech  in  which  Lord  Melbourne  introduced  the 
Bill,  probably  rather  encouraged  than  discouraged  the 
House  of  Lords  in   such   a   course.     Lord   Melbourne 


1837  Queen  Victoria.  139 

was  never  a  very  earnest  or  resolute  man,  and  he  was 
already  beginning  to  think  that  his  administration  was 
loosing  a  little  of  its  hold  on  Parliament  and  the  public. 
The  House  of  Lords,  therefore,  took  courage  enough  to 
introduce  amendments  into  the  Bill,  virtually  the  same 
as  those  which  the  House  of  Commons  had  rejected. 
The  Conservative  peers  with  Lord  Lyndhurst  at  their 
head  went  wild  over  the  Bill.  They  seemed  to  have  for 
the  most  lost  their  heads.  They  mutilated  the  Bill 
with  reckless  hands.  They  restored  all,  or  nearly  all, 
the  anomahes  which  the  Government  had  been  endea- 
vouring to  abolish.  They  positively  introduced  entirely 
novel  anomalies  and  fresh  springs  of  abuse  into  it.  They 
contrived  to  make  it  a  Bill  for  increasing  the  stringency 
of  religious  tests.  Of  course  the  House  of  Commons 
could  not  accept  such  alterations.  Peel  strongly  dis- 
countenanced the  wild  attempts  of  Lord  Lyndhurst  and 
the  Tory  peers.  Wellington  advised  the  Tories  to  give 
way,  and  at  last  even  Lyndhurst  himself  had  to  offer 
counsel  of  the  same  kind.  Lord  John  Russell  on  his 
side  recommended  the  Commons  to  yield  a  few  small 
and  unimportant  points.  The  Lords  saw  no  way  out  of 
the  difficulty  but  to  submit,  and  on  September  7,  1835, 
the  Bill,  substantially  the  same  as  when  it  left  the  House 
of  Commons,  became  the  law  of  the  land. 


CHAPTER  X. 

LEGAL    AND   SOCIAL   REFORM. 

On  June  20,  1837,  King  William  IV.  died.  He  had 
reigned  but  a  short  time.  He  came  to  the  throne  when 
he  was  already  an  old  man.  He  had  been  a  sailor,  and 
a  sailor  of  the  roughest  school,  and  in  many  of  hia 
opinions,  as,  for  example,  his  views  on  the  question  of 


1 40  Legal  and  Sociat  Reform.  1837 

the  slave  trade  and  slavery,  he  ran  counter  to  the 
feeling  of  the  great  majority  of  Englishmen.  But  on 
the  whole  he  had  made  a  respectable  constitutional 
Sovereign,  and  during  the  struggles  which  ended  in  the 
passing  of  the  Reform  Bill  he  had  behaved  with  fair- 
ness and  with  prudence.  His  death  was  followed  by 
the  accession  of  Queen  Victoria  to  the  throne.  The 
Princess  Victoria  was  his  niece.  She  was  the  -daughter 
of  the  Duke  of  Kent,  fourth  son  of  George  III.  Wil- 
liam IV.  left  no  child  living  when  he  died,  and  the 
Crown  therefore  passed  over  to  his  niece,  Victoria. 

The  Queen  was  born  on  May  24,  18 19.  She  was 
therefore  little  more  than  eighteen  years  of  age  when  she 
was  thus  suddenly  called  to  a  throne  which,  at  her  birth, 
there  could  have  been  little  expectation  that  she  would 
ever  have  to  fill.  She  was  named  Alexandrina  Victoria. 
The  name  Alexandrina  was  given  to  her  by  her  father, 
in  compliment  to  the  Emperor  of  Russia.  The  intention 
was  that  she  should  also  bear  the  name  Georgiana,  after 
her  uncle,  George  IV.,  then  Prince  Regent.  The  Duke 
of  Kent,  however,  insisted  that  Alexandrina  should  be 
her  first  name,  and  thereupon  the  Prince  Regent  declared 
that  the  name  of  Georgiana  could  not  stand  second  to 
any  other  in  the  country,  and  that  therefore  she  must  not 
bear  it  at  all.  It  was,  perhaps,  fortunate  on  the  whole 
that  the  name  of  Georgiana  was  not  given  to  the  young 
Princess.  Its  more  recent  associations  were  not  of  happy 
omen ;  to  perpetuate  them  would  not  have  been  welcome 
to  the  country.  The  Queen  had  been  carefully  brought 
up  by  her  mother  in  almost  absolute  seclusion.  None  of 
ihe  statesmen  or  officials  of  the  time  had  any  close  per- 
sonal acquaintance  with  the  young  Princess,  or  any 
*  reason  to  feel  satisfied  with  regard  to  her  opinions  or  her 
capacity.    The  Duchess  of  Kent  naturally  desired  seclu- 


1837  '^^^  Window  Tax.  141 

sion  for  the  Princess,  because  neither  at  the  Court  of 
George  IV.  nor  at  that  of  William  IV.  were  the  manners 
of  society  such  as  to  make  a  careful  mother  anxious  that 
her  daughter  should  see  much  of  Court  circles.  The 
young  Queen  surprised  everyone  almost  from  the  first 
moment  when  she  came  into  public  life  by  her  compo- 
sure, her  force  of  character,  and  her  intelligence.  Yet  so 
strong  was  the  influence  of  party  spirit,  and  so  high  did 
its  passions  run,  that  on  both  sides  of  the  political  field 
there  were  heard  wild  cries  of  alarm  at  the  Queen's  ac- 
cession. On  one  side  of  the  field,  the  clamour  was  that 
the  Tories  were  trying  to  bring  about  a  revolution  in 
favour  of  the  Hanoverian  branch  of  the  Royal  Family, 
that  they  were  plotting  to  depose  the  Queen  and  put  the 
Duke  of  Cumberland  in  her  place.  On  the  other  side, 
the  alarm-cry  was  that  the  Queen  was  sure  to  favour  the 
Roman  Catholics,  that  she  would  turn  Catholic  herself, 
or  at  the  very  least  would  marry  a  Catholic  prince.  The 
leading  paper  of  that  day  thought  it  convenient  and  be- 
coming to  remind  the  Queen  that  if  she  were  to  turn 
Catholic  or  to  marry  a  Catholic,  she  would  immediately 
forfeit  her  crown.  The  Queen  had  not  been  many 
months  on  the  throne  when  she  satisfied  every  one  that 
she  was  a  thoroughly  constitutional  Sovereign,  that  she 
was  capable  of  acting  with  absolute  impartiality  between 
Liberal  and  Tory,  and  that  she  had  full  capacity  for  the 
duties  so  suddenly  imposed  on  her.  In  1840,  the  Queen 
was  married  to  her  cousin,  Prince  Albert  of  Saxe-Coburg- 
Gotha,  who  afterwards  received  the  title  of  Prince  Con- 
sort. 

One  important  result  of  the  accession  of  Queen  Vic- 
toria was  the  severance  of  the  connection  between  this 
country  and  the  kingdom  of  Hanover,  Hanover  had 
become  connected  with  England,  because  it  was  ruled  by 


142  Legal  and  Social  Reform.  i  S3  7 

the  Prince  who,  after  the  death  of  Queen  Anne,  came  to 
be  Sovereign  of  this  country.  But  the  law  of  Hanover 
Hmited  the  sovereignty  to  men,  and  therefore,  when 
Queen  Victoria  succeeded  to  the  throne  of  England,  she 
did  not  become  Queen  of  Hanover,  but  Hanover  passed 
over  to  her  uncle,  the  Duke  of  Cumberland,  eldest  sur- 
viving brother  of  William  IV.  It  was  fortunate  for 
England  that  she  was  thus  disentangled  from  her  connec- 
tion with  Hanover.  The  Hanoverian  connection  had 
always  been  distasteful  to  most  people  here,  and  in  times 
much  more  near  to  our  own,  England  might  have  been 
involved  in  war  if  her  Sovereign  had  still  continued  to  be 
Sovereign  of  Hanover.  The  great  movement  for  German 
unity,  which  went  on  in  later  years,  would  hardly  have 
been  stayed  by  the  existence  of  a  kingdom  of  Hanover 
under  what  would  have  been  practically  a  foreign  Sove- 
reign. England  would  either  have  had  to  face  the 
responsibility  of  maintaining  Hanover  against  Germany 
or  the  discredit  of  surrendering  it. 

The  reforms  which  were  going  on  satisfactorily  under 
a  Sovereign  so  narrow-minded  and  uncultured  as  Wil- 
liam IV.,  were  not  likely  to  be  stayed  in  their  course  or 
to  become  less  substantial  in  their  character  under  the 
rule  of  a  Queen  so  intelligent  and  liberal-minded  as 
Victoria,  On  the  contrary,  the  energy  of  reform  seemed 
to  grow  in  strength  and  to  be  guided  with  increasing 
enlightenment.  Apart  from  purely  political  questions, 
the  great  subjects  of  the  reformer's  interest  when  Queen 
Victoria  came  to  the  throne  were  the  condition  of  na- 
tional education,  the  criminal  law,  and  the  system  of 
taxation.  It  seems  hard  to  believe  now  how  stupid  and 
barbarous  were  the  principles  on  which,  even  up  to  the 
time  of  the  Queen's  accession,  and  for  long  after,  the 
taxation  of  the  country  and  its  criminal  law  were  carried 


1832-37  Cn'minai  Law  Reforms.  143 

on.  Newspapers  were  taxed,  as  if  people  ought  to  be 
prevented  from  reading  them  ;  windows  were  taxed,  as 
if  it  were  the  business  of  the  Government  to  take  care 
that  men  and  women  did  not  have  too  much  air  and 
sunlight  in  their  houses.  The  window  tax  had  been  in 
existence  for  centuries,  and  about  this  time  used  to  re- 
turn more  than  a  million  of  money  every  year  to  the 
revenue.  A  house  was  taxed  according  to  the  number 
of  its  windows,  and  the  result  of  course  was  that  house- 
holders reduced  the  number  as  much  as  possible,  and 
the  poorer  a  man  was  the  greater  was  the  necessity  for 
his  depriving  his  family  of  light  and  air.  A  common 
practice  was  to  paint  rows  of  windows  on  one  of  the 
solid  walls  of  a  house,  so  that  the  house  might  at  least 
seem  to  the  hasty  passer-by  to  enjoy  that  light  which 
the  rigour  of  taxation  denied  it.  Twenty  years  had  yet 
to  pass  away  before  this  odious  tax  was  finally  abol- 
ished. 

Soon  after  the  Queen's  accession  an  attempt  was  made 
to  establish  something  like  a  system  of  national  educa- 
tion. The  first  movement  that  way  had  been  made  a 
few  years  earlier,  in  1834.  The  movement  then  began 
by  a  grant  of  money  for  the  purposes  of  elementary  edu- 
cation. Twenty  thousand  pounds  was  the  sum  first 
given,  and  the  same  grant  was  made  each  successive 
year  until  1839,  when  Lord  John  Russell  asked  for  an 
increase  of  10,000/.,  and  proposed  a  change  in  the  way 
of  distributing  the  money.  At  first  the  grant  was  given 
through  the  National  School  Society,  a  body  in  direct 
connection  with  the  English  Church,  and  the  British 
and  Foreign  School  Association,  which  admitted  chil- 
dren of  all  denominations  without  imposing  on  them 
sectarian  instruction.  Lord  John  Russell  obtained  an 
order  in  council  transferring  the.  distribution  of  the  mo- 


X44  Legal  and  Social  Reform.  1 83  7 

ney  to  a  committee  of  privy  council.  The  proposals  of 
the  Government  were  bitterly  opposed  in  both  Houses  of 
Parliament.  An  application  of  the  public  money  through 
the  hands  of  the  committee  of  the  privy  council,  not  in 
any  sense  under  the  direct  control  and  authority  of  the 
State,  was  denounced  as  a  State  endowment  of  popery 
and  heresy.  The  Government,  however,  succeeded  in 
carrying  their  point,  and  established  their  Committee  of 
Privy  Council  on  Education,  the  institution  in  whose 
hands  the  management  of  the  whole  system  of  public 
instruction  has  rested  ever  since. 

Some  of  the  most  effective  and  benign  measures  to 
mitigate  the  harshness  of  our  criminal  legislation  were 
taken  in  this  chapter  of  our  history.  The  Custody  of 
Infants  Bill  was  one  of  the  first  legislative  declarations 
that  there  is  any  difference  between  an  English  wife  and 
a  purchased  slave  woman,  so  far  as  the  power  of  the 
master  over  either  is  concerned.  The  Custody  of  In- 
fants Bill  gave  to  mothers  of  irreproachable  conduct, 
who,  from  no  fault  of  their  own,  were  living  apart  from 
their  husbands,  occasional  access  to  their  children,  with 
permission  and  under  control  of  the  judges.  It  seems 
marvellous  to  us  now  to  think  that  there  ever  could 
have  been  a  time  when  such  a  measure  met  with  resist- 
ance from  rational  human  beings.  Reforms  were  going 
on  year  after  year  in  the  criminal  law.  The  severity  of 
the  death  punishment  was  mitigated  by  successive  Acts 
of  Parliament.  In  1832,  capital  punishment  was  abol- 
ished in  cases  of  horse-stealing,  sheep-stealing,  coining, 
larceny  to  the  value  of  5/.  in  a  dwelling-house,  and 
other  offences.  In  1833,  house-breaking  ceased  to  be 
a  capital  crime.  In  1834,  a  man  who  had  escaped  from 
transportation,  and  come  back  to  this  country,  was  no 
longer  liable  to  the  punishment  of  death.    In  1835,  letter- 


1837  Transportation.  145 

stealing  by  servants  in  the  Post  Office  was  removed 
from  the  black  list  of  capital  offences,  One  curious 
result  of  all  these  gradual  reductions  of  the  death  pen- 
alty, has  been  to  establish  a  much  nearer  proportion,  in 
our  days,  between  the  number  of  persons  sentenced  to 
death  and  the  number  of  persons  actually  executed. 
When  the  death  sentence  was  made  to  apply  to  almost 
every  offence  that  men  or  women  could  commit,  it  was 
impossible,  seeing  that  human  nature  must  then,  as 
now,  have  had  some  compassion  in  it,  that  all  these 
sentences,  or  even  a  considerable  portion  of  them, 
could  ever  have  been  carried  into  effect.  For  example, 
in  1824,  1,066  persons  were  sentenced  to  death,  of  whom 
only  40  were  executed.  In  the  following  year,  1,036  were 
sentenced  and  50  executed.  In  1837,  438  persons  were 
sentenced  to  death,  of  whom  only  8  were  executed.  But 
if  we  come  down  to  milder  times,  we  find  that  in  i860, 
48  were  sentenced  and  12  executed.  In  1861,  50  persons 
were  sentenced  and  15  executed.  In  the  earlier  years 
the  number  of  executions  is  hardly  i  in  20  to  the  number 
of  sentences,  while,  in  the  later  years,  it  is  sometimes  i 
in  2.  The  superiority  in  the  policy  of  our  times  is  not 
merely  its  being  a  policy  of  greater  mercy,  but  also  in 
its  being  a  policy  of  greater  efficacy.  If  the  death  sen- 
tence is  to  hav«  any  influence  at  all  in  deterring  from 
crime,  its  influence  must  be,  in  a  great  degree,  by  the 
certainty  of  its  infliction.  It  is  obvious,  therefore,  that  a 
sentence  of  which  there  are  15  inflictions  out  of  50  con- 
demnations, must  be  more  effective  as  a  deterrent  than 
a  sentence  which  is  only  inflicted  40  times  in  1,066  cases 
of  its  delivery.  The  question  whether  the  death  penalty 
ought  to  be  inflicted  at  all,  whether  its  deterring  effect 
is  really  so  considerable  as  to  render  it  worth  retaining 
the  punishment,  is  one  of  great  public  interest  and  im- 
L 


1 46  Legal  and  Social  Reform.  1837 

portance,  but  into  which  it  is  not  necessary  at  present  to 
enter.  The  point  on  which  we  desire  particularly  to 
insist  is,  that  not  only  have  our  modern  principles  miti- 
gated the  action  of  the  death  penalty,  but  they  have,  at 
the  same  time,  so  applied  it  as  to  render  its  deterrent 
effect,  if  it  has  any,  more  distinct  and  operative  than  it 
could  have  been  in  days  less  humane. 

How  to  deal  with  criminals  not  sentenced  to  the  death 
penalty,  or  on  whose  behalf  that  penalty  had  been  miti- 
gated, was  a  question  which  occupied  the  attention  of 
Parliament  during  many  successive  years.  The  system 
of  transportation  had  grown  to  be  an  intolerable  nui- 
sance to  our  rising  colonies.  Transportation,  as  a  sys- 
tematised  means  of  getting  some  of  our  criminals  out  of 
our  way,  began  in  the  time  of  Charles  II.  The  judges 
then  gave  power  for  the  removal  of  criminals  to  the 
North  American  colonies.  The  colonies,  however,  as 
they  grew  into  civilisation  and  strength,  began  to  protest 
against  this  use  being  made  of  their  soil,  and  of  course 
the  revolt  of  the  North  American  provinces,  and  the 
creation  of  the  United  States  of  America,  rendered  it 
pecessary  for  England  to  send  her  convicts  to  some 
other  part  of  the  world.  In  1787  a  cargo  of  criminals 
was  sent  to  Botany  Bay,  on  the  eastern  shore  of  New 
South  Wales.  Afterwards,  convicts  were  sent  to  Van 
Diemen's  Land  and  to  Norfolk  Island,  a  solitary  island 
in  the  Pacific,  800  miles,  or  thereabouts,  from  the  shores 
of  New  South  Wales.  Norfolk  Island  has  been  de- 
scribed as  the  penal  settlement  for  the  convicted  among 
convicts,  that  is  to  say,  criminals,  who  having  been 
transported  to  New  South  Wales  committed  new  crimes 
there,  might  be  selected  by  the  colonial  authorities,  and 
sent  for  severer  punishment  to  Norfolk   Island. 

There  had  been  growing  up  in  this  country  an  im- 


1837  Transportation.  147 

pression  for  a  long  time  that  the  transportation  system 
was  the  parent  of  intolerable  evils.  It  had  been  con- 
demned by  Romilly  and  Bentham.  In  1837,  the  House 
of  Commons  appointed  a  committee  to  consider  the 
whole  question.  Amongst  others  on  the  committee  were 
Sir  Robert  Peel,  Lord  John  Russell,  Mr.  Charles  Duller, 
Sir  William  Molesworth,  and  Lord  Howick,  afterwards 
Earl  Grey.  The  evidence  put  before  that  committee 
disclosed  a  number  of  horrors  which  made  it  certain 
that  the  transportation  system  must  come  to  an  end. 
Norfolk  Island,  as  we  have  said,  was  kept  for  the  con- 
victed among  the  convicts.  A  number  of  men,  thorough- 
ly brutalised,  were  left  there  to  herd  together  like  beasts. 
They  worked,  when  they  did  work  at  all,  in  chains. 
They  were  roused  at  daybreak,  turned  out  to  labour  in 
their  chains,  and  allowed  to  huddle  back  to  their  dens 
when  dark  had  set  in.  In  Sydney,  the  convicts  received, 
after  a  certain  period  of  probation,  a  conditional  free- 
dom, or  what  we  have  lately  called  a  ticket-of-leave. 
They  were  allowed  to  work  for  the  colonists.  Anyone 
requiring  labourers  or  servants  could  apply  to  the  au- 
thorities and  have  male  or  female  convicts  assigned  to  him 
to  do  his  work.  These  convict  labourers  and  servants 
were  hardly  better  in  condition  than  slaves.  They  were 
assigned  over  to  masters  and  mistresses,  for  whom  they 
had  to  work  as  ordered,  and  whose  commands,  however 
capricious,  they  had  to  obey.  A  special  code  of  laws 
existed  for  the  discipline  of  these  unfortunate  creatures. 
They  moved  about  openly  in  the  ordinary  life  of  the 
place,  working  in  trades,  acting  as  domestic  servants, 
labouring  in  the  fields.  They  were  living  under  con- 
ditions unknown  to  civilised  life  elsewhere.  On  the 
complaint  of  a  master  or  mistress,  men  could  be  flogged 
with  as  many  as  fifty  lashes  for  ordinary  disobedience. 


1 48  Legal  and  Social  Reform.      1 700- 1 840 

After  a  while,  of  course,  they  lost  all  hope  of  reform,  all 
sense  of  decency.  Their  lives  were  alternations  of  pro- 
fligacy and  punishment.  The  worse  a  man  was,  the 
better  he  was  likely  to  be  able  to  endure  such  an 
existence.  Indeed,  a  genuine,  downright,  irreclaimable 
scoundrel  often  liked  well  enough  the  kind  of  life  he 
found  in  New  South  Wales.  He  had  ample  opportunity 
for  profligacy,  and  as  long  as  he  obeyed  the  immediate 
orders  of  his  master  or  mistress,  he  was  not  likely  to  be 
flogged.  Sometimes  the  wives  of  convicts  went  out  to 
the  colony,  started  some  business  or  some  farming  work 
there,  and  had  their  husbands  assigned  to  them  as 
servants.  It  is  shown  in  the  evidence  that  in  a  certain 
number  of  instances  the  women,  probably  to  pay  off  old 
scores,  took  occasion  now  and  then  to  have  their  hus- 
bands flogged.  The  publication  of  the  report  of  the 
committee  filled  the  public  mind  with  so  much  horror 
that  it  was  evident  to  all  persons  that  the  abandonment 
of  transportation  was  only  a  question  of  time.  The 
colonists  themselves  in  most  places  began  to  interfere 
and  to  protest  against  it.  At  last  it  came  so  far  that  only 
in  Western  Australia  were  residents  willing  to  receive 
convicts  on  any  conditions,  and  Western  Australia  had 
little  opportunity  of  receiving  many  of  our  outcasts, 
The  finding  of  gold  in  Australia  settled  at  last  the 
question  of  these  colonies  being  made  any  longer  places 
for  the  shooting  of  our  human  rubbish.  It  would  be  im- 
possible to  send  out  shiploads  of  criminals  to  a  region 
full  of  the  temptations  of  gold.  Various  projects  were 
formed  of  starting  convict  settlements  in  other  places, 
but  in  every  case  some  clear  objection  arose,  and 
although  for  many  years  after,  committees  of  both 
Houses  of  Parliament  reported  in  favour  of  some  sort  of 
transportation  system,  they  also  recorded  their  conviction 


1829  The  Police  Force.  149 

that  it  would  be  impossible  to  carry  on  the  existing  sys- 
tem any  longer.  Its  death  sentence  was  passed  when 
the  report  of  the  commission  was  published. 

It  would  not  be  right,  in  surveying  the  political  and 
social  improvements  which  belong  to  this  period,  not  to 
speak  of  the  great  advantage  secured  for  peace  and  order 
in  towns  and  cities,  and  indeed  everywhere  over  the 
country,  by  the  organization  and  development  of  the 
police  system.  The  London  police  force,  remodelled  by 
Sir  Robert  Peel,  and  constructed  very  much  as  we  now 
know  it,  began  its  duty  about  the  time  when  this  history 
opens.  Before  that  time  there  had  only  been  a  miserably 
inefficient  watch  system,  the  sport  of  satirists,  and  not  at 
all  the  terror  of  evil-doers.  The  Metropolitan  organiza- 
tion became  the  model  for  the  police  force  of  all  the 
great  towns  of  England  and  Scotland,  and  for  the  capital 
of  Ireland.  But  the  police  force  of  Ireland  in  general  is 
a  semi-militarj'  body,  embodied  to  deal  with  a  condition 
of  things  entirely  different  from  that  which  exists  in 
England. 

A  few  words  may  be  given  to  the  small  but  very  im- 
portant reform  effected  in  the  interests  of  humanity  by  the 
suppression  of  the  practice  of  sending  boys  up  chimneys 
to  clean  them.  The  trade  of  the  chimney-sweep  pursued 
in  this  way  was  unknown,  we  believe,  to  any  country  ex- 
cept in  England.  It  began  in  England  about  the  begin- 
ning of  that  eighteenth  century  whose  ways  have  lately 
occupied  so  much  of  our  attention,  and  called  forth  so 
many  more  or  less  unsuccessful  attempts  at  imitation. 
Most  of  the  chimneys  of  the  English  houses  were  narrow 
and  crooked,  and  it  was  for  a  long  time  held  as  an  article 
of  faith  that  there  was  no  efficient  way  of  cleansing  them 
except  by  sending  a  poor  boy  to  climb  from  the  fireplace 
to  the  top  of  the  chimney,  and  proclaim  that  he  had 


150  Legal  and  Social  Reform.  1835 

accomplished  his  task  by  crying  "  sweep,"  when  his  soot- 
covered  head  and  shoulders  emerged  into  the  open  air. 
Nothing  could  have  been  more  brutal  than  the  treatment 
of  these  poor  climbing  boys.  Their  hands,  arms  and 
knees  were  abrased  and  injured  by  the  constant  friction 
against  the  walls  of  the  chimney.  It  sometimes  happened 
that  the  boy  was  sent  up  before  the  chimney  had  had 
time  to  cool  after  the  extinction  of  the  fire,  and  then  the 
poor  creature  ran  the  risk  of  being  severely  burnt. 
Sometimes  he  was  severely  burnt.  Frequently  the  chim- 
ney was  narrow  and  the  child  stuck  fast  in  it,  and  was 
only  rescued  with  much  trouble.  In  certain  cases  the 
boy  when  taken  out  was  found  to  be  dead.  Most  people 
had  grown  so  familiarised  with  this  abominable  habit  that 
it  never  occurred  to  them  to  think  of  the  suffering  of 
the  poor  creatures  whom  they  saw  sent  up  into  their 
chimneys — sometimes  forced  to  go  up  by  threats  and 
blows  from  the  master  sweep.  At  last,  however,  humane 
persons  began  to  call  attention  to  the  evil,  and  then  an 
agitation  set  in  against  it.  Evidence  was  brought  before 
the  public  to  show  that  in  some  cases  where  a  boy  had 
stuck  fast,  the  master  sweep  insisted  that  he  was  lazy 
and  perverse,  and  lit  a  fire  in  the  grate  in  order  to  force 
the  poor  creature  to  climb.  It  was  shown  that  in  several 
instances  the  master  sweeps  had  employed  little  girls 
where  they  could  not  easily  get  boys,  and  it  was  stated 
in  Liverpool  that  a  case  was  discovered  inwhicha  master 
sweep  for  many  years  employed  his  wife,  a  young  and 
small  woman,  to  do  the  work  of  a  climbing  boy.  The 
barbarous  practice  was  suppressed  by  legislation  in  1840, 
but  for  a  considerable  time  after  its  legal  suppression  it 
continued  to  be  secretly  practised,  in  some  places  prac- 
tised with  almost  no  pretence  of  secrecy.  Finally,  public 
opinion  became  thoroughly  awakened  to  the  horrors  of 


1835  The  Press- Gang.  151 

the  whole  system,  and  the  practice  of  using  climbing 
boys  fell  into  absolute  disuse.  Chimneys  now  are  built 
to  suit  a  rational  and  humane  system,  and  the  sweeping 
machines  have  been  found  to  do  their  work  far  better 
than  even  the  most  patient  and  energetic  poor  little  boy 
who  ever  was  victimized  in  the  early  days. 

Among  the  earlier  reforms  of  this  period  we  must  not 
omit  to  mention  one  which  abolished  a  great  grievance 
that  had  long  supplied  themes  for  the  romancist,  the 
poet,  and  the  painter,  and  even  still  continues  occasion- 
ally to  supply  them.  This  was  the  abolition  of  the  law 
of  impressment  for  the  navy.  The  law  of  impressment, 
rather  indeed  a  custom  than  a  law,  was  of  the  most 
ancient  practice.  In  the  days  of  Richard  II.  it  was  spoken 
of  as  a  system  long  in  existence  and  well  known.  It  was, 
however,  regulated  by  a  great  variety  of  Acts  of  Parlia- 
ment in  various  times,  but  by  no  possible  regulation 
could  it  be  anything  except  a  monstrous  grievance.  From 
Richard  II. 's  time,  through  Philip  and  Mary,  Elizabeth, 
William  III.,  Anne,  George  II.  and  George  III.,  Acts  of 
Parliament  Iiad  been  passed  for  its  regulation  and  re- 
striction. The  principle  simply  was  that  when  the 
Government  required  seamen  to  carry  on  a  war,  they 
would  take  them  where  they  could  get  them.  The  sea 
port  towns  were  of  course  the  place  where  they  sought 
them,  and  sailors  in  the  merchant  marine  were  the  men 
preferred  for  service  on  board  ship.  Our  literature  is  full 
of  pathetic  stories  of  young  seamen  pressed  as  they  were 
returning  from  the  church  where  they  had  been  married, 
and  carried  off  to  serve  the  Sovereign  on  the  seas,  per- 
haps not  to  return  during  many  long  years,  perhaps  not 
to  return  at  all.  There  is,  we  believe,  at  least  one  true 
story  of  a  seaman  who  was  thus  carried  off  after  his 
wedding,  who  served  all  through  the  long  stretch  of  the 


152  Legal  and  Social  Reform.  1839 

war  between  France  and  England,  and  who  returned  a 
man  of  more  than  middle  age,  to  find  his  wife  long  since 
dead,  and  himself  a  forgotten  stranger  in  the  home  of  his 
youth.  Sometimes  the  carrying  out  of  the  impressment 
service  led  to  serious  riots.  In  Captain  Marryat's  once 
popular  novels  there  arc  given  descriptions,  which  we 
doubt  not  are  true  in  the  main,  of  the  difficulties  which 
attended  sometimes  the  capture  of  seamen  for  His 
Majesty's  fleet.  We  read  of  serious  resistance  offered  in 
some  of  the  lower  quarters  of  Portsmouth,  and  of  the 
women  joining  in  the  fray,  and  seamen  being  dangerously 
wounded,  of  shots  fired  from  windows,  of  a  stubborn 
resistance  made  from  room  to  room,  and  at  last  of  the 
objects  of  the  search  being  captured  and  carried  off 
much  as  the  remnants  of  a  stubborn  garrison  might  be 
taken  by  storm.  Many  anti-reformers  of  that  time 
thought,  as  anti-reformers  have  always  done  when  any 
improvement  is  proposed,  that  it  would  be  utterly  impos- 
sible to  carry  on  the  service  if  the  power  to  impress  sea- 
men was  not  allowed  to  remain  in  the  hands  of  the 
authorities.  The  press-gang  was,  however,  abolished  by 
a  Bill  which  the  Government  brought  in  in  1835,  and 
which  limited  compulsory  service  to  five  years  in  the 
navy.  Since  that  time  Governments  have  again  and 
again  been  occupied  in  the  consideration  of  measures  to 
supply  the  navy  with  a  sufficient  stock  of  seamen,  and 
also  to  maintain  a  good  naval  reserve.  The  first  step, 
however,  to  maintaining  a  really  respectable  body  of  men 
in  the  service,  was  taken  when  the  Government  abolished 
the  press-gang.  So  long  as  that  system  existed  it  was 
not  practically  possible  to'  do  away  with  the  flogging 
discipline.  The  men  who  were  snatched  up  and  pressed 
for  service  on  board  ship  were  not  likely  at  first  to  settle 
down  quietly  to  all  the  proper  discipline  and  organization 


1839  Postal  Reform.  153 

of  the  navy.  Sometimes  the  press-gang  carried  off  men 
who  were  but  the  scum  of  the  seaport  towns,  hardly 
better  than  the  gaol-bird  class.  One  or  two  of  these  men 
impregnated  with  his  bad  habits  half  a  forecastle  full  of 
sailors,  and  it  is  fairly  to  be  acknowledged  that  very 
stringent  measures  of  discipline  were  sometimes  required 
to  keep  such  persons  in  order.  The  abolition  of  the 
press-gang  system  rendered  possible  the  abolition  of 
flogging,  and  one  can  hardly  believe  that  there  can  be 
any  serious  difficulty,  by  wise  and  liberal  measures  on 
the  part  of  the  Government,  to  maintain  an  excellent 
naval  reserve,  and  to  induce  a  good  class  of  men  to 
enter  that  naval  service  which  has  been  always  so  es- 
pecially popular  among  the  English  people. 

One  of  the  greatest  social  reforms  accomplished 
during  all  this  time  was  the  change  in  the  postal  system. 
For  a  long  succession  of  years  the  charge  for  the  delivery 
of  letters  through  the  post  had  amounted  to  a  practical 
exclusion  of  all  the  poorer  classes  from  its  substantial 
benefits.  The  rates  of  postage  had  been  high  and  varied. 
They  varied  with  regard  to  distance  and  with  regard  to 
the  weight  and  even  the  size  or  shape  of  a  letter.  There 
was  a  London  district  post  which  was  a  distinct  branch 
of  the  whole  department,  and  with  a  different  scale  for 
the  transmission  of  letters.  The  average  charge  on  every 
letter  throughout  the  kingdom  was  a  little  more  than  dd. 
A  letter  from  London  to  Brighton  cost  8^/.,  from  London 
to  Aberdeen  i^.  yi.,  from  London  to  Belfast  \s.  \d.  As 
if  this  tax  was  not  enough,  there  was  an  arrangement 
that  if  the  letter  included  more  than  one  sheet  of  paper  it 
should,  no  matter  what  its  weight,  come  under  a  higher 
rate  of  charge.  Members  of  Parliament  could  send 
letters  free  through  the  post  to  a  certain  extent ;  members 
of  the  Government  could  send  them  through   without 


154  -^  ^S^i  ^^"■'i  Social  Reform.  1837 

limit.  The  country  has  now  almost  forgotten  the  frank- 
ing system.  Few  people  remember  the  time  when  the 
name  of  a  Member  of  Parliament  scrawled  upon  the 
outside  of  a  letter  sent  it  free  through  the  post.  It  was 
not  alone  the  member's  own  letter  or  letters  which  thus 
went  free.  Any  letter  which  he  endorsed  with  his  name 
was  entitled  to  the  same  privilege.  In  other  words,  people 
who  could  best  afford  to  pay  for  their  letters  sent  them 
without  charge,  and  those  who  could  least  afford  to  pay 
anything  had  to  pay  a  double  rate,  that  is,  to  pay  for  the 
transmission  of  their  own  letters  and  to  make  good  the 
deficiency  in  the  postal  revenue  caused  by  the  privilege 
conferred  upon  the  class  who  would  send  their  letters  free 
of  charge.  In  the  years  between  1815,  that  is,  imme- 
diately after  the  close  of  the  great  war,  and  1835,  the 
population  of  this  country  had  increased  30  per  cent. 
The  stage-coach  duty  has  increased  128  per  cent.  In 
other  words,  the  population  has  increased  by  nearly  a 
third,  and  the  amount  of  travelling  done  by  stage-coach 
had  more  than  doubled  itself  All  this  time  the  revenue 
of  the  Post  Office  had  remained  stationary.  In  most 
other  countries,  if  not  in  all,  the  postal  revenue  had  been 
steadily  increasing.  In  the  United  States  the  postal 
revenue  had  trebled  itself,  although  the  American 
system  of  posting  was  full  of  inconveniences  and  defects, 
which  might  themselves  have  been  thought  sufficient  to 
prevent  a  great  increase  in  the  transmission  of  letters. 

The  extravagant  system  prevailing  in  England  did 
not  merely  interfere  with  the  correspondence  of  the 
public.  It  did  that  which  all  other  unreasonable  re- 
strictions have  the  effect  of  doing,  it  created  illicit 
organisations  for  the  purpose  of  defeating  the  law. 
Enterprises  for  the  transmission  of  letters  privately,  at 
lower  rates  than   those   charged  by  the   government, 


i795~i879  Rowland  Hill.  155 

sprang  up  everywhere.  It  is  said  that  the  owners  of 
almost  every  kind  of  public  conveyance  were  concerned 
in  this  traffic.  Five  out  of  every  six  of  all  the  letters 
that  passed  between  London  and  Manchester  were 
believed  to  have  been  carried  for  many  years  by  this 
unlawful  process.  Some  great  commercial  firms  sent 
fifty  letters  by  this  secret  means  of  despatch  for  every 
one  on  which  they  paid  the  Government  tax.  The 
system  was  inquisitorial  in  its  operation.  An  additional 
tax  was  laid  on  where  a  letter  was  written  on  more 
sheets  of  paper  than  one,  and  the  post  office  officials 
kept  up  a  frequent  tampering  with  the  seals  of  letters  in 
order  to  find  out  whether  or  not  they  ought  to  be  charged 
according  to  the  higher  rate.  Mr.  Hill,  afterwards  Sir 
Rowland  Hill,  is  the  man  to  whom  we  all  owe  the  adop- 
tion of  that  uniform  system  which  since  his  time  has 
been  adopted  by  every  civilised  state.  A  remarkable 
member  of  a  remarkable  family,  Mr.  Hill  inherited 
social  reform  from  his  ancestors,  and  breathed  in  its 
spirit  from  the  atmosphere  around  him.  A  story  which 
Coleridge  used  to  tell,  called  his  attention  to  the  un- 
reasonableness of  the  post  office  system.  Coleridge 
once,  in  the  lake  district,  saw  a  postman  deliver  a  letter 
to  a  woman  at  a  cottage  door.  The  woman  looked  at 
it  but  handed  it  back,  dccHning  to  pay  the  postage, 
which  was  a  shilliing.  Coleridge  heard  her  say  that  the 
letter  was  from  her  brother.  He  paid  the  shilling  for 
her,  in  spite  of  a  certain  demonstration  of  objection  on 
her  part.  When  the  postman  had  gone  she  explained 
to  Coleridge  that  he  had  wasted  a  shilling.  There  was 
nothing  in  the  letter.  Her  brother  and  she  had  agreed 
long  before  that  while  all  was  well  with  him  he  was  to 
send  a  blank  sheet  once  a  quarter,  and  she  thus  had 
news  of  him  without  paying  the  postage.     This  at  once 


156  Legal  and  Social  Reform.  1 840 

struck  Mr.  Rowland  Hill  as  a  proof  that  there  must  be 
something  fundamentally'  wrong  in  the  system  which 
drove  a  brother  and  sister  to  cheat  the  revenue,  in  order 
to  gratify  the  reasonable  desire  to  hear  of  each  other's 
welfare.  He  set  himself  at  once  to  work  out  a  compre- 
hensive plan  of  reform,  which  he  laid  before  the  world 
early  in  1837.  The  essence  of  his  plan  lay  in  the  prin- 
ciple that  the  cost  of  the  conveyance  of  letters  through 
the  post  was  but  trifling,  and  was  but  little  increased  by 
the  distance  over  which  they  had  to  be  conveyed.  His 
idea  was  that  the  rates  of  postage  should  be  reduced  to 
the  minimum,  that  the  speed  of  conveyance  should  be 
increased,  that  there  should  be  a  greater  frequency  of 
despatch,  and  that  there  should  be  a  uniform  charge  for 
the  whole  of  the  United  Kingdom.  The  strongest  oppo- 
sition, both  official  and  otherwise,  was  made  to  this 
scheme.  The  Postmaster-General,  Lord  Lichfield,  de- 
clared it  the  wildest  and  most  extravagant  project  he 
had  ever  heard  of.  He  said  the  mails  would  be  unable 
to  carry  the  letters,  that  the  walls  of  the  post  office  would 
burst,  and  that  the  whole  area  on  which  the  building 
stood  would  not  contain  the  clerks  and  the  letters. 
This,  one  would  think,  was  the  most  unlucky  argument 
against  such  a  scheme.  In  order  to  show  that  Mr.  Hill's 
plan  ought  not  to  be  adopted,  Lord  Lichfield  contended 
that  the  public  would  rush  eagerly  to  avail  themselves 
of  its  advantages.  Not  only  officials  opposed  it.  Even 
Sydney  Smith  declared  it  a  nonsensical  scheme. 

Mr.  Hill,  however,  persevered,  and  raised  a  great 
amount  of  public  opinion  in  his  favour.  His  plan  was 
referred  to  a  commission,  who  were  engaged  in  inquir- 
ing into  the  whole  conduct  of  the  post  office  department, 
and  they  reported  in  its  favour,  although  there  was  a 
general  impression  that  it  must  involve  a  considerable 


1839-40  The  Postal  Bill.  15  7 

loss  of  revenue.  Mr.  Hill's  idea  was  that  one  penny  the 
half-ounce  should  be  the  limit  of  charge  within  the 
United  Kingdom.  TheGovernment  took  up  the  scheme 
at  last  and  determined  to  run  the  risk.  The  commer- 
cial community  of  the  great  towns  generally  had  been 
naturally  much  attracted  towards  the  project.  The 
Government  determined  to  bring  in  a  Bill  to  provide 
for  the  introduction  of  the  scheme  at  once,  and  to  abol- 
ish the  franking  system,  except  in  the  case  of  official 
letters  sent  on  business  belonging  directly  to  Her 
Majesty's  service.  The  proposal  of  the  Government 
was  that  the  rate  of  postage  should  be  4^.  for  each  letter 
under  half-an-ounce  in  weight,  anywhere  within  the 
limits  of  the  United  Kingdom,  but  that  this  was  to  be 
only  a  beginning,  for  with  the  opening  of  January,  1840, 
the  postage  was  to  be  a  uniform  rate  of  one  penny  per 
letter  not  beyond  half-an-ounce  in  weight. 

The  introductory  measure  was  passed  in  both  Houses 
of  Parliament.  The  Duke  of  Wellington  declared  that 
he  strongly  objected  to  it,  but  that  as  the  Government 
evidently  were  determined  to  have  it,  he  did  not  like  to 
recommend  the  House  of  Lords  to  offer  it  any  strong 
opposition.  In  the  Commons  Sir  Robert  Peel  opposed 
it,  and  declared  that  it  must  involve  the  country  in  an 
immense  loss  of  revenue.  It  was,  however,  passed  into 
law.  We  need  hardly  say  that  it  has  not  involved  a  loss 
of  revenue,  but  that  on  the  contrary  the  post  office  has 
been  the  best  paying  department  under  the  whole  charge 
of  the  Government  since  that  time.  In  the  last  year  of 
the  heavy  postage,  1839,  ^^  number  of  letters  delivered 
in  England  andjreland  was  rather  more  than  eighty-two 
millions,  five  millions  and  a  half  as  franked  letters  which 
returned  nothing  to  the  revenues  of  the  State.  In  1875 
the  delivery  in  the  United  Kingdom  amounted  to  more 


158  Legal  and  Social  Reform.  1 840 

than  one  thousand  millions  of  le;ters.  During  that  time, 
it  is  necessary  to  observe,  the  population  has  not  nearly 
doubled  itself.  The  population  has  not  doubled,  while  the 
increase  in  the  delivery  of  letters  is  as  twelve  to  one. 
Every  other  civilised  country  has  since  adopted  this  sys- 
tem, and  at  tlve  present  time  a  letter  is  carried  from  Lon- 
don to  San  Francisco  at  a  rate  less  than  one-third  of  the 
cost  of  sending  a  letter  from  London  to  Brighton  under 
the  old  system.  Almost  all  the  countries  of  the  world 
have  since  come  into  an  international  postal  system,  by 
virtue  of  which  a  letter  can  be  sent  almost  anywhere 
over  Europe  and  all  through  the  American  States  for  2^^. 
There  can  be  little  doubt  that  fresh  reductions  will  go  on 
in  this  direction,  and  that  probably  before  long  the  average 
penny  will  take  a  letter  from  London  to  Toronto  or  to 
Chicago  as  it  takes  it  now  from  London  to  Dublin.  The 
post-card  system,  first  adopted  in  this  country,  has  been 
a  still  further  development  of  the  same  principle.  We 
are,  however,  now  anticipating  by  some  years  the  limit 
which  we  have  laid  down  for  ourselves  in  describing  this 
epoch  of  reform.  But  the  change  in  the  postal  system 
may  be  said  to  have  been  accomplished  in  its  entirety  by 
the  Act  which  came  into  force  in  1840.  The  change 
from  the  fluctuating  and  extravagant  scale  to  the  uniform 
penny  in  this  kingdom  was  the  foundation  and  origin  of 
all  the  reform  that  has  since  taken  place.  That  once 
accomplished  the  rest  followed. 

It  seems  almost  superfluous  to  point  out  that  the  new 
postal  system  could  hardly  have  been  developed  to  any 
considerable  extent  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  sudden 
growth  of  the  railway  system  throughout  the  country. 
The  railway  locomotive  had  been  in  use  for  some  years 
before  Rowland  Hill  made  his  first  eflbrt  at  postal  re- 
form.    The  railway  had  its  beginning  not  in  an  attempt 


1 781-1848  George  Stephenson.  159 

to  make  public  locomotion  more  quick  and  easy,  but  in 
the  humbler  and  narrower  purpose  of  facilitating  the 
carrying  of  loads  in  collieries  and  other  mines.  These, 
however,  were  not  steam  railways  ;  they  were  something 
like  the  tram-ways  of  our  own  days.  There  are  disputes 
as  to  the  first  inventor  of  the  steam  locomotive,  just  as 
there  are  disputes  about  the  original  authorship  of  the 
idea  of  a  penny  post.  It  is  certain  that  George  Ste- 
phenson was  not  the  first  man  who  got  into  his  mind  the 
idea  of  a  steam  locomotive ;  it  is  quite  possible  that 
some  other  man,  that  many  other  men,  may  hav* 
thought  of  the  uniform  penny  postal  system  before  Row- 
land Hill.  But  in  dealing  with  the  history  of  any  dis" 
covery  or  invention  we  must  take  as  the  author  of  a  sys- 
tem the  man  who,  not  content  with  conceiving  the  idea 
of  it,  was  able  to  show  how  that  idea  could  be  carried 
into  effect,  and  who  actually  succeeded  in  making  it  a 
reality.  There  is  nothing  ungenerous  or  unreasonable 
in  this.  Hundreds  of  chance  travellers  may  have  talk- 
ed of  the  possibility  of  piercing  Mont  Cenis  in  order  to 
make  a  railway  tunnel  under  it;  the  world  must  regard 
the  man  who  put  the  idea  into  practical  shape,  and  saw 
that  it  was  made  a  working  reality,  as  the  author  of  the 
scheme  for  tunnelling  the  Alps.  In  the  same  way  Row- 
land Hill  and  George  Stephenson  will  always  and  justly 
be  looked  up  to  as  the  originators  of  the  railway  system 
and  the  cheap  postal  system.  George  Stephenson  was 
the  son  of  a  fireman  in  a  Northumberland  colliery,  and 
began  life  himself  as  an  assistant  fireman.  Such  edu- 
cation as  he  had  he  got  at  a  night-school.  He  showed 
from  his  childhood  a  genius  for  mechanics  and  inven- 
tions. He  constructed  his  first  locomotive  engine  in 
1814:  an  engine  which  drew  eight  cars  at  the  modest 
rate  of  four  miles  an  hour.     A  railway  of  his  construe- 


1 6o  Legal  and  Social  Reform.  1830 

tion  was  opened  between  Stockton  and  Darlington  in 
1825,  the  first  railway  made  for  public  use.  Stephenson 
was  chief  engineer  of  the  Liverpool  and  Manchester 
Railway,  which  was  opened  in  1830.  The  directors  of 
the  railway  offered  a  prize  of  500/.  for  the  construction 
of  the  best  locomotive,  and  the  prize  was  won  by  George 
Stephenson.  His  engine  was  called  the  "  Rocket,"  and 
ran  at  the  rate  of  about  thirty  miles  an  hour.  Stephen- 
son's invention  was  met  by  every  kind  of  objection,  by 
ridicule,  by  grave  argument,  by  the  criticism  of  men  who 
professed  to  be  above  all  things  practical,  and  by  the 
alarmist  views  of  men  who  knew  nothing  about  the  sub- 
ject. The  opening  of  the  line  between  Manchester  nd 
Liverpool  in  1830,  was  made  memorable  by  the  death  of 
Mr.  Huskisson,  an  eminent  English  statesman.  Hus- 
kisson  had  been  in  the  Cabinet  of  the  Duke  of  Welling- 
ton, had  quarreled  with  his  leader  and  had  resigned. 
They  met  again  for  the  first  time  at  one  of  the  stations 
near  Liverpool,  on  the  occasion  of  the  opening  of  this 
line  of  railway.  The  train  stopped,  and  many  of  its 
passengers  got  out  of  the  carriage  and  walked  on  the 
platform.  Huskisson  saw  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  and 
the  Duke  of  Wellington  made  a  movement  towards  him. 
Huskisson  hurried  to  respond  to  the  apparent  invitation, 
and  in  endeavouring  to  reach  the  Duke,  was  struck  by 
the  moving  train  and  killed. 

Nothing  can  be  more  remarkable  than  the  change 
which  the  railway  brought  about  in  the  conditions  of 
travel.  No  change  made  since  men  began  to  travel 
down  to  the  invention  of  the  railway  was  of  any  marked 
importance.  An  Englishman  travelling  from  London 
to  Rome  during  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  King  Wil- 
liam IV.,  would  have  travelled  exactly  as  one  of  the  Ro- 
toan  generals  would  have  done  who  left  England  for 


1837  The  Electric  Telegraph.  161 

Rome  in  the  days  of  the  Cassars.  In  each  case  the 
traveller  would  have  had  all  the  speed  that  horses  and 
sails  could  give  and  no  more.  A  traveller  in  Victoria's 
reign  is  borne  with  a  speed  which  to  our  ancestors  would 
have  seemed  like  that  of  the  wind,  and  by  means  of  an 
agency  which  during  long  centuries  had  never  occurred 
to  the  imagination  even  of  enthusiasts  and  dreamers  as 
a  possible  means  of  locomotion. 

Still  more  marvellous  than  the  railway  is  the  electric 
telegraph.  The  authorship  of  this  wonderful  discovery 
and  application  is,  like  that  of  the  railway  and  the  postal 
system,  still  in  dispute.  In  1837  a  patent  was  taken  out 
by  two  Englishmen,  Professor  Wheatstone  and  Mr. 
Cooke,  for  a  plan  of  transmitting  messages  by  means  of 
an  electric  current  sent  along  a  wire.  In  the  very  same 
year  Professor  Morse,  an  American  electrician,  made 
application  to  the  Congress  of  his  coimtry  for  some'  aid 
towards  the  construction  of  a  telegraph  of  a  similar  kind, 
and  he  was  refused.  He  sought  to  take  out  a  patent  in 
England  the  year  after,  but  he  had  come  too  late. 
Wheatstone  and  Cooke  had  been  beforehand  with  him. 
It  is  likely  enough  that  the  same  idea  may  have  occurred 
to  other  men  before  Wheatstone  or  Cooke  or  Morse  ; 
but  we  must  regard  Wheatstone  and  Cooke  as  practi- 
cally the  authors  of  that  marvellous  system  of  communi- 
cation which  sends  words  over  far  distances  almost  as 
quickly  as  man's  thoughts  can  traverse  them  ;  which  has 
grown  from  a  local  into  a  national  and  from  a  national 
into  an  international  system  ;  which  brings  London  and 
Edinburgh  closer  for  the  interchange  of  message  than 
the  east  and  westends  of  Fleet  Street  were  fifty  years  ago, 
and  lately  has  brought  London  and  San  Francisco, 
London  and  Melbourne,  London  and  Calcutta,  as  close 
together  as  London  and  Edinburgh. 
M 


1 62       The  Stockdalc  Case. — Irish  Education.      1837 


IT**  CHAPTER   XI. 

THE  STOCKDALE  CASE.      IRISH    EDUCATION. 

The  famous  trial  of  Stockdale  v.  Hansard  raised  a 
very  important  point  of  law,  which,  however,  it  did  not 
conclusively  settle.  It  brought  up  the  question  how  far 
the  protection  of  the  House  of  Commons  will  extend  to 
secure  immunity  against  libel  for  a  publisher.  At  one 
time  the  case  not  only  occupied  the  most  serious  atten- 
tion of  the  House  of  Commons  and  of  the  country,  but 
threatened  to  bring  the  Commons  into  something  like 
permanent  antagonism  with  the  Courts  of  Law.  Parlia- 
ment had  passed  a  Bill  appointing  inspectors  of  prisons, 
and  these  inspectors  were  desired  to  report  annually  on 
the  condition  of  each  prison  which  they  visited.  In  their 
first  report  they  mentioned  that  they  had  found  in  New- 
gate a  book  published  by  the  Messrs.  Stockdale,  which 
they  considered  to  be  indecent  and  obscene.  The  opinion 
of  the  inspectors  was  published  in  the  ordinary  Parlia- 
mentary reports  which  Messrs.  Hansard  issued.  We 
need  not  discuss  the  merits  of  the  publication  itself.  It 
seems  to  have  been  a  book  on  a  subject  very  proper  and 
necessary  for  the  study  of  medical  men  and  medical 
students,  but  which  had  no  particular  business  amongst 
the  literature  furnished  ill  prisons.  Stockdale  brought 
an  action  against  Hansard  for  publishing  the  report,  and 
insisted  that  the  publication  was  libel.  Hansard  pleaded 
that  the  publication  was  privileged  and  that  the  state- 
'  ment  was  true.  The  case  came  before  Lord  Denman, 
Chief  Justice  of  the  King's  Bench,  in  February,  1837. 
The  jury  found  the  libel  justified  by  the  character  of  the 


1837  Stockdale  Hansard.  163 

work  itself,  and  therefore  brought  in  a  verdict  for  the 
defendant  on  the  second  issue  which  he  had  raised. 
This  way  of  deahng  with  the  question  got  rid  of  the 
difficult  point  as  to  privilege,  so  far  as  the  jury  were  con- 
cerned. The  Chief  Justice,  however,  himself  called  atten- 
tion to  that  issue,  and  declared  that  whatever  arrange- 
ment the  House  of  Commons  might  make  with  any 
publishers,  anyone  who  published  a  statement  which 
might  be  injurious  or  ruinous  to  one  of  His  Majesty's 
subjects,  "  must  answer  in  a  court  of  justice  to  that  subject 
if  he  challenges  him  for  that  libel.''  The  House  of  Com- 
mons could  not  sit  down  quietly  under  such  a  ruling  as 
this.  On  the  motion  of  Lord  John  Russell,  it  resolved 
"  that  the  power  of  publishing  all  such  reports,  visits,  and 
proceedings,  shall  be  necessary  as  an  essential  incident 
to  the  constitutional  functions  of  Parliament  ;  that  by  the 
law  and  privilege  of  Parliament  the  House  of  Commons 
has  the  sole  and  exclusive  jurisdiction  as  to  the  existence 
and  extent  of  its  privileges,  and  that  for  any  court  or 
tribunal  to  decide  upon  matters  of  privilege,  inconsistent 
with  the  determination  of  cither  House  of  Parliament,  is 
a  breach  and  contempt  of  the  privileges  of  Parliament." 
Stockdale  was  not  disturbed  by  this  resolution.  He 
bought  a  second  copy  of  the  report  of  the  prison  inspec- 
tors, and  brought  a  second  action  against  the  publisher. 
The  Attorney-General  was  directed  to  put  a  pica  on  re- 
cord that  Hansard  had  acted  by  the  order  of  the  House 
of  Commons.  The  four  judges  of  the  Court  of  Queens 
Bench  unanimously  decided  against  the  plea,  and 
Stockdale's  damages  v/ere  set  down  at  a  hundred  pounds. 
The  House  of  Commons  referred  the  matter  again  to  a 
committee.  The  majority  of  members  of  Parliament 
thought  the  time  had  come  for  asserting  the  privileges  of 
the  House,  but  Lord   John  Russell,  Sir  Robert  Peel  ana 


1 64    TTie  Stockdale  Case. — Irish  Education.  1837-39 

others,  were  inclined  to  get  out  of  the  dispute  by  yield- 
ing to  the  Law  Courts.  By  a  small  majority,  184  votes 
to  166,  the  House  agreed  to  a  motion  proposed  by  Lord 
John  Russell  and  supported  by  Sir  Robert  Peel,  pro- 
mising to  take  proceedings  for  the  purpose  of  staying 
the  execution  of  judgment.  Stockdale,  however,  was 
not  content  with  his  victory,  but  in  1839  ^^  went  to 
Hansard's  once  more,  bought  a  third  copy  of  the  Prisons 
Report,  and  brought  a  third  action  against  the  pub- 
lishers. He  was  awarded  600/.  damages  and  40/.  costs. 
The  Sheriffs  of  London  were  called  upon  to  seize  and 
sell  some  of  the  property  of  the  Hansards  to  satisfy  the 
demands  of  the  plaintiff.  The  money  was  paid  into  the 
Sheriffs'  Court  under  protest,  in  order  to  avoid  the 
scandal  of  a  sale.  The  House  of  Commons  ordered  the 
Sheriffs  to  refund  the  money  to  the  Hansards.  The 
Court  of  Queen's  Bench  was  applied  to  for  an  order 
directing  them  to  pay  the  money  over  to  Stockdale.  The 
Sheriffs  were  finally  committed  to  the  custody  of  the 
Serjeant-at-Arms,  for  contempt  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. The  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  at  once  served  a 
iNx'\\.oi  habeas  corpus,  calling  upon  him  to  release  the 
Sheriffs.  The  House  directed  the  Serjeant-at-Arms  to 
inform  the  Court  that  he  held  the  Sheriffs  in  custody  by 
order  of  the  Commons.  The  Serjeant-at-Arms  con- 
ducted the  Sheriffs  to  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  and 
made  his  explanation  there.  The  explanation  was  de- 
clared reasonable,  and  he  was  allowed  to  conduct  his 
prisoners  back  again.  The  whole  affair  was  becoming 
ridiculous  and  humiliating.  Not  only  did  Stockdale 
persevere  with  his  actions,  but  numbers  of  other  men, 
fired  by  his  example,  continued  to  bring  actions  for 
publications  reflecting  on  them  and  contained  in 
official  reports  to  the  House  of  Commons.      The  public 


i837~39  Lord  Denman* s  Ruling.  165 

in  general  sided  with  the  Sherififs  and  the  Judges, 
and  against  the  authority  of  the  House  of  Commons. 
It  must  have  been,  one  would  think,  owing  in  a  great 
measure  to  the  defects  of  the  Ministry  itself,  that 
popular  feeling  went  so  much  against  them.  The 
House  of  Commons  must  have  fallen  strangely  into  dis- 
repute when  outsiders  could  regard  its  action  in  this 
case,  and  even  the  principle  on  which  its  actions  rested 
as  the  overbearing  conduct  of  a  despotic  House  endea- 
vouring to  crush  a  few  humble  men.  But  the  question 
which  the  House  of  Commons  sustained  is,  to  us,  one  of 
great  importance.  The  view  of  the  law  on  which  Lord 
Denman  rested  his  ruling,  was  that  Parliament  has 
power  to  protect  any  publications,  but  that  the  House  of 
Commons  is  not  Parliament ;  is  only  one  of  the  estates 
of  the  realm ;  and  therefore  is  not  authorised  to  sanction 
the  publications  of  libels  and  to  protect  those  who  pub- 
lished them  against  the  Courts  of  Law.  But  it  seems 
clear  that  to  secure  to  each  House  of  Parliament  an 
absolute  authority  and  freedom  of  publication  is  of  the 
utmost  importance  to  the  least  protected  classes  of  the 
community.  No  harm  that  could  possibly  come  from 
the  undue  exercise  of  such  a  privilege  could  be  compared 
to  the  evils  which  must  arise  from  any  restriction  of  the 
rights  of  either  House  to  publish  whatever  it  thought 
proper  for  the  common  good.  Reform  of  any  kind  is 
only  obtained  through  freedom  of  debate  and  through 
that  publicity  which  freedom  of  debate  secures.  It  would 
not  be  of  much  avail  to  allow  the  utmost  liberty  of  dis- 
cussion in  Parliament,  as  was  done  at  all  times,  if  the 
publication  of  the  debates  were  restricted,  and  thus  the 
sentiment  of  the  country  were  never  to  be  fully  reached. 
The  poorer  or  humbler  a  man  or  a  class  may  be,  the 
greater  need  is  there  for  him  to  insist  on  full   freedom 


1 66       The  Stockdale  Case. — Irish  Education.      1840 

of  publication  by  cither  House  in  Parliament.  The  abo- 
lition of  slavery,  the  protection  of  factory  children,  the 
putting  down  of  the  system  which  employed  boys  to 
climb  chimneys,  the  repression  of  the  practice  which 
sent  sailors  to  sea  in  vessels  no  better  than  rotten  coffins, 
all  these  are  reforms  which  never  could  have  been  carried 
but  through  the  influence  of  public  opinion,  aroused  by 
the  publication  of  debates  and  reacting  on  each  House  of 
Parliament. 

In  the  end  the  controversy  was  closed  by  a  Bill 
brought  in  by  Lord  John  Russell  on  March  3,  1840,  to 
afford  projection  to  all  persons  employed  in  the  publica- 
tion of  Parliamentary  papers.  This  Bill  proposed  that  any 
person  against  whom  civil  or  criminal  proceedings  should 
be  taken  on  account  of  any  such  publication  might  bring 
before  the  Court  a  certificate  under  the  hand  of  the  Lord 
Chancellor  or  the  Speaker,  stating  that  it  was  published 
by  the  authority  of  the  House,  and  that  the  proceedings 
should  at  once  be  stayed.  This  Bill,  though  it  was 
strongly  opposed  by  lawyers  in  both  Houses,  was  passed 
quietly  through,  and  became  law  on  April  14.  It  settled 
the  question  in  a  practical  and  simple  way  for  the  time, 
but  it  did  not  define  the  relative  rights  of  Parllamentand 
the  Courts  of  Law.  Since  then,  however,  these  rights 
have  practically  defined  themselves.  It  is  now  regarded 
as  settled  that  cither  Houseof  Parliament  may  authorise 
the  publication  in  print  of  any  document  which  it  con- 
siders necessary,  and  there  will  be  no  Stockdales  found 
in  our  days  rash  enough  to  attempt  to  found  legal  pro- 
ceedings on  such  a  charge.  If  any  difficulty  were  again 
to  arise,  it  would  then  assuredly  be  necessary  to  define 
and  secure  the  privilege  of  either  House  of  Parliament. 
The  difficulty,  however,  will  in  all  probability  not  arise, 
and  the  question  may  be  regarded  as  at  an  end. 


1845  The  Queen' s  Colleges.  ^j      167 

/ 
The  Government  made  an  attempt  in/ 1865  to  supply 

the  defects  of  middle  class  education  in  Ifcland.  They 
started  the  scheme  of  the  Queen's  Colleges.  The  idea 
was  to  establish  in  Ireland  three  colleges  for  the  purpose 
of  diffusing  higher  education  among  the  middle  and 
upper  classes,  and  indeed  among  all  classes,  high  and 
low,  who  felt  inclined  to  avail  themselves  of  the  institu- 
tions. The  principle  on  which  these  colleges  were  to 
be  conducted  was  that  of  a  mixed  education.  They 
were  to  be  open  to  all  sects  without  distinction.  Their 
honours,  their  offices,  everything,  were  to  be  free  of 
religious  test.  On  the  other  hand  religious  teaching  of 
any  kind  was  to  be  excluded  from  them.  They  were  to 
be  secular  in  the  strictest  sense.  One  college  was  to  be 
in  Cork,  one  in  Belfast,  and  one  in  Galway,  and  the 
whole  were  to  be  affiliated  to  an  institution  called  the 
Queen's  University,  having  an  examining  but  no  teach- 
ing power.  At  that  time  there  was  in  Ireland  only  one 
University.  That  was  the  University  of  Dublin,  with  its 
one  college.  Trinity,  the  college  being  in  many  respects 
hardly  distinguishable  from  the  University.  Trinity 
College,  Dublin,  had  grown  to  be  an  essentially  Protes- 
tant institution.  It  did  indeed  receive  and  educate 
Catholic  young  men,  but  it  gave  them  none  of  its 
honours,  and  they  could  take  part  in  none  of  its  official 
work.  Therefore,  although  young  Catholics  did  resort  to 
Trinity  for  the  sake  of  education,  it  may  be  said  that  the 
Catholic  body  generally  felt  themselves  shut  out  from  its 
advantages.  They  were  at  all  events  at  a  very  painful 
disadvantage.  The  Catholic  young  man,  educated  side 
by  side  with  the  Protestant  in  Trinity,  was  handicapped 
cruelly  in  his  studies  by  the  knowledge  that  he  could 
not  compete  with  his  fellow  students  for  any  of  the 
honours  or  rewards  which  the  institution  gave  to  mem- 


1 68       The  Stockdale  Case. — Irish  Education.     1845 

bers  of  the  Established  Church.  It  was  to  supply  this 
very  obvious  defect,  to  get  rid  of  this  really  national 
grievance,  that  Sir  Robert  Peel,  now  in  power,  devised 
the  plan  of  the  Queen's  Colleges  and  Queen's  University 
in  Ireland.  Almost  immediately  on  the  scheme  being 
laid  before  the  House  of  Commons,  Sir  Robert  H.  Inglis, 
whom  we  have  already  mentioned  in  these  pages,  a  Tory 
of  a  school  now  passing  quite  away  denounced  the 
scheme  and  branded  the  institutions  by  a  name  which 
has  clung  to  them  ever  since,  that  of  the  "godless  col- 
leges." It  afterwards  came  to  be  a  common  impression 
that  O'Connell  was  the  man  who  stigmatised  the  colleges 
with  this  name.  Sir  Robert  Inglis,  however,  was  the 
inventor  of  the  epithet.  O'Connell  afterwards  adopted 
it  and  gave  it  wider  significance  and  popularity.  Sir 
Robert  Peel's  scheme  broughthim  into  direct  opposition 
with  two  great  sections  of  the  community,  themselves 
reciprocally  antagonistic.  The  Protestants  of  the  ex- 
tremer  order,  and  most  of  the  Roman  Catholics,  joined  in 
condemnation  of  a  system  which  proposed  to  omit  re- 
ligious teaching  from  national  education.  The  colleges 
were,  however,  founded,  built,  and  carried  on.  Staffs  of 
teachers  and  professors  were  appointed.  For  a  while  it 
seemed  probable  that  the  institutions  would  really 
prosper  and  be  popular.  But  after  a  time  the  heads  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  met  in  synod  and  condemned 
the  principle  of  the  institutions  in  the  same  sense  that 
Sir  Robert  Inglis  had  condemned  it,  and  from  that  time 
they  may  be  said  to  have  languished  in  Ireland,  They 
turned  out  some  very  successful  scholars,  not  only 
Protestants,  but  Catholics,  and  it  is  not  unworthy  of  re- 
mark that  some  of  their  most  successful  students  have 
been  most  prominent  in  the  attacks  on  the  principle 
which  was  the  central  point  of  their  existence.     But  the 


1845  The  Maynooth  Grant.  169 

difficulty  of  education,  that  is  to  say,  of  a  Government 
system  of  education,  in  a  country  like  Ireland,  was  not 
to  be  solved  by  such  a  scheme  as  that  of  Sir  Robert  Peel. 
Looking  at  it  with  impartial  eye,  and  removing  oneself  as 
far  as  possible  from  the  mere  sectarian's  point  of  view,  we 
cannot  deny  that  the  difficulty  raised  by  the  Roman 
Catholics  is  one  of  serious  importance.  It  seems  at  the 
first  glance  a  satisfactory  and  safe  concession  to  freedom 
of  religion  if  the  State  founds  an  institution  which  shall 
teach  all  classes  and  sects  alike,  independent  of  any 
religious  test  and  free  from  the  possibility  of  religious 
controversy.  But  then  this  can  only  be  had  under  ordi- 
nary conditions  by  the  virtual  exclusion  of  religious 
teaching  from  the  institution  altogether.  Here,  then,  is 
aroused  the  conscientious  objection  of  those  who  declare 
that  they  would  rather  have  no  teaching  at  all  than  a 
mere  secular  teaching  from  which  religious  questions  are 
excluded.  Here  the  Protestants,  or  a  large  body  of  them, 
and  the  Roman  Catholics  joined  hands.  It  seems  clear 
that  there  is  not  a  genuine  religious  equality  in  the 
system  which  offers  education  of  a  purely  secular  kind, 
alike  to  those  who  conscientiously  approve  of  such  a 
system  of  instruction  and  those  who  conscientiously  dis- 
approve of  it.  Successive  Governments  have  been  en- 
gaged in  attempts  to  reconcile  the  system  founded  by 
Sir  Robert  Peel  with  the  scruples  of  the  Irish  Roman 
Catholic  population,  and  up  to  this  time  they  have  not 
succeeded.  The  importance  to  us  in  considering  Peel's 
scheme  is  that  it  was  at  all  events  the  first  distinct  ad- 
mission on  the  part  of  the  English  Government  that  the 
Irish  Roman  Catholics  were  unjustly  treated  by  the 
system  which  left  to  Ireland  only  one  great  University, 
and  that  of  a  distinctly  Protestant  character. 

The   debates  which  took   place   on  the  proposal  to 
establish  the  Queen's  Colleges  were  animated  and  in. 


170       The  Stockdale  Case. — Irish  Education.      1845 

teresting.  Mr.  Gladstone  supported  Sir  Robert  Peel 
both  by  voice  and  by  votes,  but  he  resigned  his  office  in 
the  Government  shortly  after,  because  of  another  at- 
tempt made  by  Sir  Robert  Peel  to  conciliale  the  Roman 
Catholics.  This  was  the  increase  of  the  grant  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  college  of  Maynooth  in  Ireland,  a 
college  specially  founded  for  the  education  of  young  men 
who  desire  to  enter  the  ranks  of  the  priesthood.  Sir 
Robert  Peel  was  not  the  first  to  propose  the  grant.  From 
a  time  preceding  the  Act  of  Union  a  grant  of  some  kind 
had  been  made  to  Maynooth.  Sir  Robert  Peel  merely 
proposed  to  make  that  sufficient  which  was  then  insuffi- 
cient, to  allow  such  a  sum  as  might  enable  the  authorities 
of  the  college  to  keep  it  in  repair  and  to  accomplish  the 
purpose  for  which  it  was  intended.  The  proposal  of  the 
Ministry  created  a  fierce  outcry  all  over  the  country. 
There  was  really  no  question  of  principle  whatever  in- 
volved. As  Macaulay  put  it,  there  was  no  more  princi- 
ple at  issue  than  there  would  be  in  the  sacrifice  of  a 
pound  instead  of  a  penny  weight  on  some  particular 
altar.  Nearly  half  Peel's  party  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons voted  against  his  scheme  on  the  second  reading, 
and  Mr.  Gladstone,  then  Vice-President  of  the  Board  of 
Trade,  resigned  his  place  rather  than  support  the 
measure.  He  had  written  a  book  on  the  relations  of 
Church  and  State,  and  he  declared  that  he  did  not  think 
the  views  he  had  expressed  in  that  v/ork  allowed  him  to 
take  any  part  in  Sir  Robert  Peel's  proposal  for  increas 
ing  the  Maynooth  grant  The  measure  was  carried,  but 
it  bequeathed  a  controversy  which  raged  furious  and 
constant  through  the  House  of  Commons  and  through 
the  country  for  some  five-and-twenty  years  after.  When 
the  Maynooth  grant  was  finally  abolished,  it  was 
abolished  in  a  way  which  would  little  have   satisfied 


1845  Irish  Education.  171 

those  who  opposed  it.  It  came  to  an  end  as  a  necessary 
consequence  of  the  measure  by  which  Mr.  Gladstone 
abohshed  his  State  Church  in  Ireland. 

The  scheme  of  the  Government  for  elementary  educa- 
tion in  Ireland  had  to  contend  against  difficulties  of  a 
similar  kind.  For  a  long  time  the  public  teaching,  such  as 
it  was,  in  Ireland  had  been  conducted  on  the  principle  of 
what  Mr.Walpole  in  his  "  History  of  England"  describes 
very  correctly  as  "  protection  in  religion."  The  whole  idea 
of  public  instruction  for  the  Irish  people  was  founded  on 
thehopeof  its  gradually  and  insensibly  converting  the 
populations  to  the  Established  Church.  The  idea  was 
akin  to  that  which  commonly  inspires  a  Government  deal- 
ing with  an  alien  race — the  idea  of  gradually  substituting 
the  language  of  the  conquerors  for  the  language  of  the 
conquered.  This  latter  difficulty,  curiously  enough,  was 
one  which  never  really  came  in  the  way  of  English  rule 
in  Ireland.  No  resistance  was  made  to  the  substitution 
of  the  English  language  for  the  Irish.  The  change  came 
about  insensibly,  without  deliberate  effort,  and  without 
any  manner  of  serious  objection.  Charles  Lever,  the 
Irish  novelist,  has  made  a  Greek  girl  in  one  of  his  stories 
express  her  wonder  that  the  Irish  people,  even  while 
striving  to  resist  English  ascendency,  should  yet  make 
their  speeches  and  sing  their  songs  in  the  English 
language.  No  Greek,  she  says,  would  consent  to  speak  at 
home  in  the  tongue  of  the  Turk.  But  the  difficulty  which 
did  not  exist  in  the  matter  of  language,  was  thought  by 
many  statesmen  easytogctoverinthemattcrof  religion. 
The  true  way,  they  thought,  to  make  the  Irish  thoroughly 
loyal,  was  to  gradually  educate  the  Irish  children  in  the 
tenets  of  the  Protestant  Church.  It  was  for  a  long  time 
forbidden  by  penal  laws  to  any  Irishman,  a  Roman 
Catholic,  to  avail  himself  of  the  services  of  a  Catholic 


172       The  Stockdale  Case. — Irish  Education.      184* 

priest  or  a  Catholic  tutor  for  his  children.  The  poorei 
classes  either  had  to  give  up  all  idea  of  education  foi 
their  children,  or  to  send  them  to  be  taught  in  the  Pro' 
testant  Charter  Schools.  The  Charter  Schools  were  an 
entire  failure.  Howard,  the  great  prison  reformer,  drew 
attention  to  some  of  the  abuses  in  their  administration, 
and  early  in  the  century.  Royal  commissions  were 
appointed  to  inquire  into  that  subject,  and  into  the  whole 
question  of  Irish  education.  In  1827  the  information 
collected  by  these  commissions  was  referred  to  a  select 
committee.  The  select  committee  accepted  in  principle 
the  recommendation  of  each  commission.  Each  alike 
had  laid  it  down  as  a  principle  that  the  instruction  of  the 
Irish  people  should  not  be  joined  with  any  attempt  to 
influence  the  religious  faith  of  any  class  of  Christians. 
The  select  committee  accepted  the  principle,  and  declared 
it  to  be  of  the  utmost  importance  to  bring  the  children  of 
the  different  faiths  together,  so  as  to  give  them  a  com- 
mon education  on  general  subjects,  and  to  leave  them  to 
be  taught  their  religious  faith  under  a  separate  system 
and  under  the  control  of  their  own  guardians  and 
ministers.  In  1830  the  committee  on  the  condition  of 
the  Irish  poor  brought  forward  again  the  suggestion  of 
the  select  committee  on  Irish  education,  and  recom- 
mended its  adoption  in  practice.  It  was  then  at  last 
admitted,  both  by  legislation  and  by  public  opinion,  that 
the  idea  of  converting  the  Irish,  by  forcing  them  to  pass 
through  Protestant  Charter  Schools,  was  a  failure. 
Lord  Stanley,  as  Chief  Secretary  for  Ireland,  had  the 
task  of  introducing  the  first  comprehensive  Education 
Bill.  This  Bill  proposed  to  establish  a  Board  of  National 
Education  in  Dublin,  to  be  composed  of  Roman  Catholic 
as  well  as  Protestant  members,  and  to  have  the  control 
and  direction  of  all  the  national  schools,  as  they  were 


1845  "^^^  Irish  Education  Board.  173 

called,  in  Ireland — that  is,  the  schools  which  were  to 
receive  aid  from  the  State.  There  had  been  for  some 
time  in  existence  a  private  association  called  the  Kildare 
Place  Society,  which  undertook  to  establish  cheap  schools 
of  its  own,  to  assist  other  schools  in  various  parts  of  the 
country,  and  to  educate  teachers.  It  endeavoured  to  get 
over  the  religious  difficulty  by  giving  no  religious  instruc- 
tion in  its  schools,  and  only  arranging  that  a  portion  of 
the  Bible  should  be  read,  without  comment,  each  day. 
The  Government  had  been  in  the  habit  of  giving  a  grant 
to  the  Kildare  Place  Society.  The  society,  however,  was 
not  accepted  by  the  Roman  Catholics.  They  demurred 
to  any  system  of  teaching  which  did  not  include  dis- 
tinct religious  instruction,  and  which  did  not  provide  for 
the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  to  Roman  Catholics 
by  ministers  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  Lord 
Stanley  now  proceeded  to  transfer  the  grant  formerly 
given  to  the  Kildare  Place  Society  to  the  Board  of 
National  Education  which  he  was  about  to  found,  In 
the  schools  under  the  Board,  the  children  of  every 
religious  denomination  were  to  have  a  literary  educa- 
tion together,  and  a  separate  religious  instruction. 
Selections  only  from  the  Bible  were  to  be  read  in  school 
time,  on  two  days  in  the  week,  and  the  Bible  itself  was 
to  be  read  before  and  after  school  hours  on  the  other 
days.  Thus,  those  who  wished  to  hear  the  Bible  read 
could  hear  it  by  coming  before  and  remaining  after 
the  regv.lar  hours,  and  those  who  desired  Biblical  in- 
struction only  from  the  ministers  of  their  own  church 
could  remain  away.  The  objection  raised  to  this  scheme 
came,  in  the  first  instance,  from  the  Protestant  side  of 
the  controversy.  Sir  R.  H.  Inglis  declared  that  the 
Bible  was  rejected  and  insulted  by  any  restrictive  regu- 
lation, and  demanded  that  the  people  should  have  the 


174       The  Stockdale  Case. — Irish  Education.       1845 

Bible,  the  whole  Bible,  and  nothing  but  the  Bible.  The 
attack,  however,  was  not  strong  enough  to  prevent  the 
Bill  from  being  passed.  The  House  agreed  to  a  vote 
in  aid  of  Lord  Stanley's  measure.  For  a  while  the  new 
Board  of  Education  worked  very  well.  Archbishop 
Whately,  the  Protestant  Archbishop  of  Dublin,  and 
Archbishop  Murray,  the  Roman  Catholic  prelate,  were 
alike  anxious  to  make  the  best  they  possibly  could  of 
the  advantages  placed  within  their  reach,  and  sincerely 
desirous  to  spread  through  Ireland  the  benefits  of  a 
genuine  national  education.  They  both  served  upon 
the  Education  Board,  and  succeeded  in  effecting  the 
compromise  by  which  a  copy  of  the  Bible,  with  certain 
debatable  pass.ages  omitted,  might  be  read  in  schools 
attended  alike  by  Roman  Catholic  and  Protestant  chil- 
dren. But  the  outcry  was  raised  with  renewed  violence 
from  both  sides  of  the  field  of  controversy.  Dr.  Phill- 
potts,  a  Protestant  prelate,  denounced  the  spending  of 
public  money  on  what  he  called  the  propagation  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  faith.  It  was  complained  that  monks 
and  nuns  had  been  allowed  to  take  charge  of  education 
in  Ireland,  and  it  was  said  that  in  one  school  certain 
Protestant  children  had  been  induced  to  remain  and 
witness  the  celebration  of  mass.  On  the  other  hand. 
Dr.  MacHale,  the  Roman  Catholic  Archbishop  of  Tuam, 
condemned  the  compromise  Bible,  as  we  may  call  it,  on 
which  Dr.  Whately  and  Dr.  Murray  had  agreed,  as  a 
volume  destructive  to  faith.  The  controversy,  we  may 
say,  has  gone  on  from  that  time  to  this.  The  difficulty 
of  framing  a  common  system  of  education,  which  shall 
include  those  who  believe  in  secular  education,  and 
those  who  regard  it  as  dangerous  and  odious,  can 
hardly  ever  be  completely  got  over.  But  there  can  be 
no  doubt  that,  despite  all  differences  and  all  objections. 


1815-46  I'he  Com  I  .-.uis.  175 

the  national  system  of  education  then  founded  in  Ire- 
land has  accomplished  very  great  and  valuable  results. 
Viewed  as  a  mere  teaching  system,  some  of  ils  organisa- 
tions were  admirably  adapted  to  convey  to  children  a 
genuine  knowledge  of  the  subject,  and  not  to  teach 
them  to  repeat  in  parrot  tones  long  words  to  which  they 
attached  no  meaning.  The. Irish  peasant  child  has 
naturally  a  taste  for  instruction,  and  where  the  teachers 
were  adapted  for  the  work,  the  schools  were  always  suc- 
cessful in  doing  some  substantial  good.  At  all  events, 
whatever  modification  or  rearrangement  may  be 
adopted,  now  or  at  any  future  time,  to  meet  religious 
scruples  on  either  side  of  the  controversy,  it  was  an 
eventful  epoch  in  the  history  of  Ireland,  when  a  Minis- 
try agreed  to  establish  a  great  popular  system  of  educa- 
tion which  should  endeavour  to  deal  fairly  with  the  chil- 
dren of  all  faiths,  and  should  not  try  to  exalt  one  re- 
ligious denomination  at  the  expense  of  another. 


CHAPTER  XII.  ''*" 


FREE  TRADE. 


Ayh 


The  repeal  of  the  corn  laws  was  one  of  the  greatest 
measures  of  reform  passed  in  this  long  and  busy  period. 
The  corn  laws  were  the  laws  which  imposed  a  duty  on 
the  importation  of  foreign  grain  into  England.  At  one 
time  this  duty  amounted  practically  to  prohibition.  In 
181 5,  the  celebrated  Corn  Law  was  passed,  which  was 
itself  moulded  on  the  Corn  Law  of  1770.  By  the  Act  of 
181 5,  wheat  might  be  exported  upon  a  payment  of  u.per 
quarter  customs  duty,  but  the  importation  of  foreign 
grain  was  practically  prohibited  until  the  price  of  wheat 
in  England  had  reached  Soj.  a  quarter,  that  is  to  say. 


176  Free  Trade.  1815-46 

until  a  certain  price  had  been  secured  for  the  grower  of 
grain  at  the  expense  of  all  the  consumers  in  this  country. 
It  was  not  permitted  to  Englishmen  to  obtain  their  sup- 
plies from  any  foreign  land,  unless  on  conditions  that 
suited  the  English  corn-grower's  pocket. 

We  may  perhaps  make  this  principle  a  little  more 
clear,  if  it  be  necessary,  by  illustrating  its  working  on  a 
small  scale  and  within  narrow  limits.  In  a  particular 
street  in  London,  let  us  say,  a  law  is  passed  declaring 
that  no  one  must  buy  a  loaf  of  bread  out  of  that  street,  or 
even  round  the  corner,  until  the  price  of  bread  has  risen 
so  high  in  the  street  itself  as  to  secure  to  its  two  or  three 
bakers  a  certain  enormous  scale  of  profit  on  their  loaves. 
When  the  price  of  bread  has  been  forced  up  so  high  as 
to  pass  this  scale  of  profit,  then  it  would  be  permissible 
for  those  who  stood  in  need  of  bread  to  go  round  the 
corner  and  buy  their  loaves  of  the  baker  in  the  next 
street;  but  the  moment  that  their  continuing  to  do  this 
caused  the  price  of  the  baker's  bread  in  their  own  street 
to  fall  below  the  prescribed  limit,  they  must  instantly 
take  to  buying  bread  within  their  own  bounds  and  of 
their  own  bakers  again.  This  is  a  fair  illustration  of  the 
principle  on  which  the  corn  laws  were  moulded.  The 
Corn  Law  of  181 5  was  passed  in  order  to  enable  the 
landowners  and  farmers  to  recover  from  the  depression 
caused  by  the  long  era  of  foreign  war.  It  was  "  rushed 
through  "  Parliament,  if  we  may  use  an  American  expres- 
sion ;  petitions  of  the  most  urgent  nature  poured  in 
against  it  from  all  the  commercial  and  manufacturing 
classes,  and  in  vain.  Popular  disturbances  broke  out  in 
many  places.  The  poor  everywhere  saw  the  bread  of 
their  family  threatened,  saw  the  food  of  their  children 
almost  taken  out  of  their  mouths,  and  they  naturally 
broke  into  wild  extremes  of  anger.     In  London  there 


1 8 1 5-46  Protection.  177 

were  serious  riots,  and  the  houses  of  some  of  the  most 
prominent  supporters  of  the  Bill  were  attacked.  The 
incendiary  went  to  work  in  many  parts  of  the  country. 
At  that  time  it  was  still  the  way  in  England,  as  it  is  now 
in  Russia  and  other  countries,  for  popular  indignation  to 
express  itself  in  the  frequent  incendiary  fire.  At  one 
place  near  London  a  riot  las'.cdfortwo  days  and  nights  ; 
the  soldiers  had  to  be  called  out  to  put  it  down,  and  five 
men  were  hanged  for  taking  part  in  it. 

After  the  passing  of  the  Corn  Law  of  181 5,  and  when 
it  had  worked  for  some  time,  there  were  sliding  scale 
acts  introduced,  which  established  a  varying  system  of 
duty,  so  that  when  the  price  of  home-grown  grain  rose 
above  a  certain  figure,  the  duty  on  imported  wheat  was 
to  sink  in  proportion.  The  principle  of  all  these  mea- 
sures was  the  same.  How,  it  may  be  asked,  could  any 
sane  legislator  adopt  such  measures  ?  As  well  might  it 
be  asked,  how  can  any  civilised  nations  still,  as  some 
still  do,  believe  in  such  a  principle  ?  The  truth  is,  that, 
the  principle  is  one  which  has  a  strong  fascination  for 
most  persons,  the  charm  of  which  it  is  difficult  for  any 
class  in  its  turn  wholly  to  shake  off.  The  idea  is,  that  if 
our  typical  baker  be  paid  more  than  the  market  price 
for  a  loaf,  he  will  be  able  in  turn  to  pay  more  to  the 
butcher  than  the  fair  price  for  his  beef:  the  butcher 
thus  benefited  will  be  enabled  to  deal  on  more  liberal 
terms  with  the  tailor  ;  the  tailor  so  favoured  by  legisla- 
tion will  be  able  in  ais  turn  to  order  a  better  kind  of 
beer  from  tfie  publican  and  pay  a  higher  price  for  it. 
Thus,  by  some  extraordinary  process,  everybody  pays 
too  much  for  everything,  and  nevertheless  all  are  en- 
riched in  turn.  The  absurdity  of  this  is  easily  kept  out 
of  sight  where  the  protective  duties  affect  a  number  of 
varying  and  complicated  interests,  manufacturing,  com- 

N 


178  Free  Trade.  1815-46 

mercial,  and  productive.  Iti  the  United  States,  for  ex- 
ample, where  the  manufacturers  are  benefited  in  one 
place  and  the  producers  are  benefited  in  another,  and 
where  the  country  always  produces  food  abundant  to 
supply  its  own  wants,  men  are  not  brought  so  directly 
face  to  face  with  the  fallacy  of  the  principle  as  they  were 
in  England  at  the  time  ol  the  Anti-Corn  Law  League. 
In  America  Protection  affects  manufacturers  for  the  most 
part,  and  there  is  no  such  popular  craving  for  cheap 
manufactures  as  to  bring  the  protective  principle  into 
collision  with  the  daily  wants  of  the  people.  But  in 
England,  during  the  reign  of  the  corn  law,  the  food 
which  the  people  put  into  their  mouths  was  the  article 
mainly  taxed,  and  made  cruelly  costly  by  the  working 
of  Protection. 

Nevertheless,  the  country  put  up  with  this  system  down 
to  the  close  of  the  year  1836.  At  that  time  there  was  a 
stagnation  of  trade  and  a  general  depression  of  busi- 
ness. Severe  poverty  prevailed  in  manv  districts.  In- 
evitably, therefore,  the  question  arose  in  the  minds  of 
most  men  in  distressed  or  depressed  plares,  whether  it 
could  be  a  good  thing  for  the  country  in  peneral  to  have 
the  price  of  bread  kept  high  by  factitious  means  when 
wages  had  sunk  and  work  become  scarce-  An  Anti- 
Corn  Law  association  was  formed  in  London  It  began 
pretentiously  enough,  but  it  brought  abou*^  no  result. 
London  is  not  a  place  where  popular  agitation  finds  a 
fitting  centre.  In  1838,  however,  Bolton,  in  I.-ancashire, 
suffered  from  a  serious  commercial  crisis.  Three-fifths 
of  its  manufacturing  activity  became  oaralysed  at  once. 
Many  houses  of  business  were  actually  closed  and  aban- 
doned, and  thousands  of  workmen  were  left  w\thout 
the  means  of  life  Lancashire  suddenly  roused  itself 
into  the  resolve  to  agitate  against  the  corn  laws,  and 


1815-46  Cobdcn  and  Bright.  179 

Manchester  became  the  head-quarters  of  the  movement 
which  afterwards  accomphshed  so  much.  The  Anti- 
Corn  Law  League  was  formed,  and  a  Free  Trade  Hall 
was  built  in  Manchester  on  the  scene  of  that  disturbance 
whirh  we  have  already  described  in  these  pages,  and 
which  was  called  the  massacre  of  Peterloo.  The  leaders 
of  the  Anti-Corn  Law  movement  were  Mr.  Cobden, 
Mr.  Bright,  and  Mr.  Villiers.  Mr.  Cobden  was  not  a 
Manchester  man.  He  was  the  son  of  a  Susser  farrmer. 
After  the  death  of  his  father  he  was  taken  by  his  uncle, 
and  employed  in  his  wholesale  warehouse  in  the  city  of 
London.  He  afterwards  became  a  partner  in  a  Man- 
chester cotton  factory,  and  sometimes  travelled  on  the 
commercial  business  of  the  establishment.  He  became 
what  would  then  have  been  considered  a  great  trav- 
eller, distinct,  of  course,  from  the  class  of  explorers; 
that  is,  he  made  himself  thoroughly  familiar  with  most 
or  all  of  the  countries  of  Europe,  with  various  parts  of 
the  East,  and  with  the  United  States  and  Canada.  He 
had  had  a  fair,  homely  education,  and  he  improved  it 
wherever  he  went  by  experience,  by  observation,  and 
by  conversation  with  all  manner  of  men.  He  became 
one  of  the  most  effective  and  persuasive  popular  speak- 
ers ever  known  in  English  agitation.  He  was  not  an 
orator  in  the  highest  sense.  He  had  no  imagination 
and  little  poetic  feeling,  nor  did  genuine  passion  ever 
inflame  into  fervour  of  declamation  his  quiet,  argumen- 
tative style.  But  he  had  humour;  he  spoke  simple, 
clear,  strong  English  ;  he  used  no  unnecessary  words. 
He  always  made  his  meaning  plain  and  intelligible, 
and  he  had  an  admirable  faculty  for  illustrating  every 
argument  by  something  drawn  from  reading,  or  from 
observation,  or  from  experience.  He  was,  in  fact,  the 
very  perfection  of  a  common-sense  talker,  a  man  fit  to 


i8o  Free  Trade.  1815-46 

deal  with  men  by  fair,  straightforward  argument,  to  ex- 
pose complicated  sophistries,  and  to  make  clear  the  most 
perplexed  parts  of  an  intricate  question.  He  was  ex- 
actly the  man  for  that  time,  for  that  question,  and  for 
the  persuasive  and  argumentative  part  of  the  great  con- 
troversy which  he  had  undertaken. 

Mr.  Cobden's  chief  companion  in  the  struggle  was 
Mr.  Bright,  whose  name  has  been  completely  identified 
with  that  of  Cobden  in  the  repeal  of  the  Corn  Laws. 
Mr.  Bright  was  an  orator  of  the  highest  order.  He  had 
all  the  qualifications  that  make  a  master  of  eloquence. 
His  presence  was  commanding;  his  voice  was  singularly 
strong  and  clear,  and  had  peculiar  tones  and  shades  in 
it  which  gave  indescribable  meaning  to  passages  of  an- 
ger, of  pity,  or  contempt.  His  manner  was  quiet,  com- 
posed, serene.  He  indulged  in  little  or  no  gesticulation, 
he  had  a  rich  gift  of  genuine  Saxon  humour.  These 
two  men,  one  belonging  to  the  middle  class  of  the  north, 
one  sprung  from  the  yeomanry  of  southern  England, 
had  as  a  colleague  Mr.  Charles  Villiers,  a  man  of  high 
aristocratic  family,  of  marked  ability,  and  indomitable 
loyalty  to  any  cause  he  undertook.  Mr.  Villiers  for 
some  years  represented  the  Free  Trade  cause  in 
Parliament,  and  Mr.  Bright  and  Mr.  Cobden  did  its 
work  on  the  platform.  Mr.  Cobden  first,  and  Mr. 
Bright  after  him.  became  members  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  and  they  were  further  assisted  there  by  Mr. 
Milner  Gibson,  a  mar.  of  position  and  family,  an  effec- 
tive debater,  who  had  been  at  first  a  Conservative,  but 
who  passed  over  to  the  ranks  of  the  Free  Traders,  and 
through  them  to  the  ranks  of  \\\z  Liberals  or  Radicals. 
Every  year  Mr.  Villiers  brought  on  a  motion  in  the 
House  in  favour  of  Free  Trade.  For  a  long  time  this 
motion  was  only  one  of  the  annual  performances,  which 


1815-46        The  Progress  of  Free  Trade.  181 

by  an  apparently  inevitable  necessity,  have  to  prelude 
for  many  years  the  practical  movement  of  any  great 
Parliamentary  question.  Mr.  Villiers  might  have  brought 
on  his  annual  motion  all  his  life,  without  getting  much 
nearer  to  his  object,  if  Manchester,  Birmingham,  Shef- 
field, Leeds,  and  other  great  northern  towns  had  not 
taken  the  matter  vigorously  in  hand,  if  Cobden  and 
Bright  had  not  stirred  up  the  engergies  of  the  whole 
country,  and  brought  clearly  home  to  the  mind  of  every 
man  the  plain  fact  that  reason,  argument,  and  arithme- 
tic, as  well  as  freedom  and  justice,  were  distinctly  on 
their  side. 

The  Anti-Corn  Law  League  showered  pamphlets, 
tracts,  letters,  newspapers,  all  over  the  country.  They 
sent  lecturers  into  every  town,  preaching  the  same 
doctrine,  and  proving  by  scientific  facts  the  justice  of  the 
cause  they  advocated.  These  lecturers  were  enjoined  to 
avoid  as  much  as  possible  any  appeals  to  sentiment  or 
to  passion.  The  cause  they  had  in  hand  was  one  which 
could  best  be  served  by  the  clear  statement  of  rigorous 
facts,  by  the  simple  explanation  of  economical  truths 
which  no  sophism  could  darken,  and  which  no  opposing 
eloquence  could  charm  away.  The  Melbourne  Ministry 
fell  in  1 841.  It  died  of  inanition:  its  force  was  spent. 
Sir  Robert  Peel  came  into  office.  Mr.  Cobden,  who  then 
entered  the  House  of  Commons  for  the  first  time,  seemed 
to  have  good  hope  that  even  Peel,  strong  Conservative 
though  he  was,  might  prove  to  be  a  man  from  whom  the 
Free  Traders  could  expect  substantial  assistance.  Sir 
Robert  Peel  had,  in  fact,  in  those  later  years  expressed 
again  and  again  his  conviction  as  to  the  general  truth 
of  the  principles  of  Free  Trade.  "All  agree,'  he  said 
in  1842,  "  in  the  general  rule  that  we  should  buy  in  the 
cheapest  and  sell  in  the  dearest  market."     But  he  con- 


1 82  Free  Trade.  1815-46 

tended  that  while  such  was  the  general  rule,  yet  that 
various  economical  and  social  conditions  made  it  neces- 
sary that  there  should  be  some  distinct  exceptions,  and 
he  regarded  the  corn  laws  and  sugar  duties  as  such  ex- 
ceptions. It  may  be  mentioned,  perhaps,  that  the  corn 
laws  had,  in  fact,  been  treated  as  a  necessary  exception 
by  many  of  the  leading  exponents  of  the  principles  of 
Free  Trade.  Thus  we  have  to  notice  the  curious  fact, 
that  while  Sir  Robert  Peel's  own  party  looked  -upon  his 
accession  to  power  as  a  certain  guarantee  against  any 
concession  to  the  Free  Traders,  the  Free  Traders  them- 
selves were,  for  the  most  part,  convinced  that  their  cause 
had  better  hope  from  him  than  from  a  Whig  Ministry. 

The  Free  Traders  went  on  debating  and  dividing  in 
the  House,  agitating  and  lecturing  all  over  the  country, 
for  some  years  without  any  marked  Parliamentary  suc- 
cess following  their  endeavours.  An  immense  and  over- 
whelming majority  always  voted  against  them  in  the 
House  of  Commons.  They  were  making  progress,  and 
very  great  progress,  but  it  was  not  that  kind  of  advance 
which  had  yet  come  to  be  decided  by  a  Parliamentary 
vote.  Probably  a  keen  and  experienced  eye  might  have 
noted  clearly  enough  the  progress  they  were  making. 
The  Whig  party  were  coming  more  and  more  round  to 
the  principles  of  P'ree  Trade.  Day  after  day  some  Whig 
leader  was  admitting  that  the  theories  of  the  past  would 
not  do  for  the  present,  and,  as  we  have  said,  the  Tory 
leader  had  himself  gone  so  far  as  to  admit  the  justice  of 
the  general  principles  of  Free  Trade.  At  one  point  the 
main  difference  between  Sir  Robert  Peel,  the  leader  of 
the  House  of  Commons,  and  Lord  John  Russell,  the 
leader  of  the  Opposition,  seems  to  have  been  nothing 
more  than  this,  that  Peel  still  regarded  grain  as  a  neces- 
sary exception  to  the  principle  of  Free  Trade,  and  Lord 


1815-46  The  Irish  Famine.  183 

John  Russell  was  not  clear  that  the  time  had  come  when 
it  could  be  treated  otherwise  than  as  an  exception.  An 
event,  however,  over  which  no  parties  and  no  leaders 
had  any  control,  suddenly  intervened  to  hasten  the  action 
and  spur  the  convictions  of  the  leaders  on  both  sides,  and 
especially  of  the  Prime  Minister.  This  was  the  great 
famine  which  broke  out  in  Ireland  in  the  autumn  of  1845. 
The  vast  majority  of  the  Irish  people  had  long  depended 
for  their  food  on  the  potato  alone.  The  summer  of  1845 
had  been  a  long  season  of  wet  and  cold  andsunlessness. 
In  the  autumn  the  news  went  abroad  that  the  whole 
potato  crop  of  Ireland  was  in  danger  of  destruction,  if 
not  already  actually  destroyed.  Before  attention  had 
well  been  awakened  to  the  crisis,  it  was  officially 
announced  that  more  than  one-third  of  the  entire  potato 
crop  had  been  swept  away  by  the  disease,  and  that  the 
disease  had  not  ceased  its  ravages,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
was  spreading  more  and  more  every  day.  The  general 
impression  of  those  who  could  form  an  opinion  was  that 
the  whole  of  the  crop  must  perish.  The  Anti-Corn  Law 
League  cried  out  for  the  opening  of  the  ports,  and  the 
admission  of  grain  and  food  from  all  places.  Sir  Robert 
Peel  was  decidedly  in  favour  of  such  a  course.  The 
Duke  of  Wellington  and  Lord  Stanley  opposed  the  idea, 
and  the  proposition  was  given  up.  Only  three  members 
of  the  Cabinet  supported  Sir  Robert  Peel's  proposals — 
Lord  Aberdeen,  Sir  James  Graham,  Mr.  Sidney  Herbert. 
All  the  others  objected,  some  because  they  opposed  the 
principle  of  the  measure,  and  were  convinced  that,  if  the 
ports  were  once  opened,  they  would  never  be  closed 
again,  which  indeed  was  probably  Peel's  own  conviction, 
and  others  on  the  ground  that  no  sufficient  proof  had 
yet  been  given  that  such  a  measure  was  necessary. 
Lord  John    Russell,  almost  immediately  after,  wrote  a 


184  Free  Trade.  1815-46 

letter  from  Edinburgh  to  his  constituents,  the  electors  of 
the  city  of  London,  in  which  he  declared  that  something 
must  immediately  be  done,  that  it  was  "  no  longer 
worth  while  to  contend  for  a  fixed  duty,"  and  that  an  end 
must  be  put  to  the  whole  system  of  protection,  as  "the 
blight  of  commerce,  the  bane  of  agriculture,  the  source  of 
bitter  division  among  classes,  the  cause  of  penury,  fever, 
and  crime  among  the  people."  This  letter  produced  a 
decisive  effect  on  Peel.  He  saw  that  the  Whigs  were 
prepared  to  unite  with  the  Anti-Corn  Law  League  in 
agitating  for  the  total  repeal  of  the  corn  laws,  and  he 
therefore  made  up  his  mind  to  recommend  to  the  Cabi- 
net an  early  meeting  of  Parliament,  with  the  view  to 
anticipate  the  agitation  which  he  saw  must  succeed  in  the 
end,  and  to  bring  forward,  as  a  Government  measure, 
some  scheme  which  should  at  least  prepare  the  way  for 
the  speedy  repeal  of  the  corn  laws. 

A  Cabinet  council  was  held  almost  immediately  after 
the  publication  of  Lord  John  Russell's  letter,  and  Peel 
recommended  the  summoning  of  Parliament  in  order  to 
take  instant  measures  to  cope  with  the  distress  in  Ire- 
land, and  also  to  introduce  legislation  distinctly  in- 
tended to  prepare  the  way  for  the  repeal  of  the  corn  laws. 
Lord  Stanley  could  not  accept  the  proposition.  The 
Duke  of  Wellington  was  himself  of  opinion  that  the 
corn  laws  ought  to  be  maintained,  but  at  the  same  time 
he  declared  he  considered  good  government  for  the 
country  more  important  than  corn  laws  or  any  other  con- 
siderations, and  that  he  was  therefore  ready  to  support 
Sir  Robert  Peel's  administration  through  thick  and  thin. 
Lord  Stanley  and  the  Duke  of  IJuccleuch,  however,  de- 
clared that  they  could  not  be  the  parties  to  any  legislation 
which  tended  towards  the  repeal  of  the  corn  laws.  Sir 
Robert  Peel  did  not  foci  himself  strong  enough  to   carry 


1840  Peer  s  Conversion.  185 

out  his  project  in  the  face  of  such  opposition  in  the 
Cabinet  itself,  and  he  tendered  his  resignation  to  the 
Queen.  The  Queen  sent  for  Lord  John  Russell,  but 
Russell's  party  were  not  very  strong  in  the  country,  and 
they  had  not  a  majority  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
Lord  John  tried,  however,  to  form  a  Ministry  without  a 
Parliamentary  majority,  and  even  although  Sir  Robert 
Peel  would  not  give  any  pledge  to  support  a  measure  for 
the  immediate  and  complete  repeal  of  the  corn  laws. 
Lord  John  Russell  was  not  successful.  Lord  Grey,  son 
of  the  Lord  Grey  of  the  Reform  Bill,  objected  to  the 
foreign  policy  of  Lord  Palmerston,  and  thought  a  seat  in 
the  Cabinet  ought  to  be  offered  to  Mr.  Cobden.  Lord 
John  Russell  had  nothing  to  do  but  to  announce  to  ths 
Queen  that  he  found  it  impossible  to  form  a  Ministry. 
The  Queen  sent  for  Sir  Robert  Peel  again  and  asked  him 
to  withdraw  his  resignation.  Peel  complied,  and  almost 
immediately  resumed  the  functions  of  First  Minister  of 
the  Crown.  The  Duke  of  Buccleuch  consented  to  go 
on  with  him,  but  Lord  Stanley  held  to  his  resolution  and 
had  no  place  in  the  Ministry.  His  position  as  Secretary 
of  State  for  the  Colonies  was  taken  by  Mr.  Gladstone. 
Mr.  Gladstone,  however,  did  not  sit  in  Pailiamcnt  during 
the  eventful  session  when  the  corn  laws  were  repealed. 
He  had  sat  for  the  borough  of  Newark,  which  was  under 
the  influence  of  the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  and  as  the  Duke 
of  Newcastle  had  withdrawn  his  support  from  the  Minis- 
try, Mr.  Gladstone  did  not  seek  re-election  for  Newark, 
and  remained  without  a  seat  in  the  House  of  Commons 
for  some  months. 

Parliament  met  on  January  22,  1846.  The  Speech 
from  the  Throne,  delivered  by  the  Queen  in  person,  re- 
commended the  Legislature  to  take  into  consideration 
the  necessity  of  still  further  applying  the  principle  00 


i86  Free  Trade.  1846 

which  it  had  formerly  acted,  when  measures  were  pre- 
sented "  to  extend  commerce  and  to  stimulate  domestic 
skill  and  industry,  by  the  repeal  of  prohibitive  and  the 
relaxation  of  protective  duties."  In  the  debate  on  the 
Address  Sir  Robert  Peel  rose,  after  the  mover  and  sec- 
onder had  spoken  and  the  question  had  been  put  from 
the  Chair,  and  at  once  proceeded  to  explain  the  policy 
which  he  intended  to  adopt.  His  speech  was  long  and 
laboured,  and  somewhat  wearied  the  audience  by  the 
elaborate  manner  in  which  he  explained  how  his  opin- 
ions had  been  brought  into  gradual  change  with  regard 
to  Free  Trade  and  Protection.  He  made  it,  however, 
perfectly  clear  that  he  was  now  a  convert  to  Mr.  Cob- 
den's  opinions,  and  that  he  intended  to  introduce  some 
measure  which  should  practically  amount  to  the  aboli- 
tion of  Protection.  It  was  in  this  debate,  and  immedi- 
ately after  Peel  had  spoken,  that  Mr.  Disraeli  made  his 
first  great  impression  on  Parliament.  He  had  been  in 
the  House  for  many  years  and  had  made  many  attempts, 
had  sometimes  been  laughed  at,  had  sometimes  been 
disliked,  and  occasionally  for  a  moment  admired.  But 
it  was  when  he  rose  immediately  after  Sir  Robert  Peel, 
and  denounced  Peel  as  one  who  had  betrayed  his  party 
and  his  principles,  that  he  made  the  first  deep  impression 
on  the  House  of  Commons,  and  came  to  be  considered 
as  a  serious  and  influential  Parliamentary  personage. 
"I  am  not  one  of  the  converts,"  Mr.  Disraeli  said,  "I 
am  perhaps  a  member  of  a  fallen  party."  A  new  Pro- 
tection party  was  formed  almost  immediately  under  the 
leadership  of  Lord  George  Bentinck,  a  man  of  great 
energy  and  tenacity  of  purpose,  who  had  hitherto  spent 
his  life  almost  altogether  on  the  turf,  who  had  had  almost 
no  previous  preparation  for  leadership,  or  even  for  de- 
bate, but  who  certainly,  when  he  did  accept  the  respon- 


1846  The  Fall  of  Peel.  18; 

sible  position  offered  to  him,  showed  a  considerable  ca- 
pacity for  leadership  and  an  unwearying  attention  to  his 
duties. 

On  January  27,  Sir  Robert  Peel  explained  his  financial 
policy.  His  intention  was  to  abandon  the  sliding  scale 
altogether,  to  impose  for  the  present  a  duty  of  ten  shil- 
lings a  quarter  on  corn  when  the  price  of  it  was  under 
forty-eight  shillings  a  quarter,  to  reduce  that  duty  by  one 
shilling  for  every  shilling  of  rise  in  price  until  it  reached 
fifty-three  shillings  a  quarter,  when  the  duty  should  fall 
to  four  shillings.  This,  however,  was  to  be  only  a  tem- 
porary arrangement.  It  was  to  last  but  three  years,  and 
at  the  end  of  that  time  protective  duties  on  grain  were  to 
be  wholly  abandoned.  We  need  not  go  at  any  length 
into  the  history  of  the  long  debates  on  Peel's  proposi- 
tions. The  discussion  of  one  amendment,  which  was  in 
substance  a  motion  to  reject  the  scheme  altogether,  lasted 
for  twelve  nights.  The  third  reading  of  the  Bill  passed 
the  House  of  Commons  on  May  15,  by  a  majority  of 
ninety-eight.  The  Bill  went  up  at  once  to  the  House  of 
Lords,  and  at  the  urgent  pressure  of  the  Duke  of  Wel- 
lington was  carried  through  that  House  without  any  seri- 
ous opposition.  The  Duke  made  no  secret  of  his  own 
opinions.  He  assured  many  of  his  brother  peers  that  he 
disliked  the  measure  just  as  much  as  any  one  could  do, 
but  he  insisted  that  they  had  all  better  vote  for  it 
nevertheless.  Sir  Robert  Peel  had  triumphed,  but  he 
found  himself  deserted  by  a  large  and  influential  section 
of  the  party  he  once  had«led.  Most  of  the  great  land- 
owners and  country  gentlemen  of  the  Conservative  party 
abandoned  him.  Some  of  them  felt  the  bitterest  resent- 
ment towards  him.  They  believed  he  had  betrayed 
them,  although  nothing  could  be  more  clear  than  that  for 
years  he  had  distinctly  been  making  it  known  to  the 


1 88  Free  Trade.  1846 

House  that  Lis  principles  inclined  him  towards  Free 
Trade,  and  thereby  leaving  it  to  be  understood  that,  if 
opportunity  or  emergency  should  compel  him,  he  would 
be  glad  to  declare  himself  a  Free  Trader,  even  in  the 
matter  of  grain. 

Strange  to  say,  the  day  when  the  Bill  was  read  in  the 
House  of  Lords  for  the  third  time  saw  the  fall  of  Peel's 
Ministry.  The  fall  was  due  to  the  state  of  Ireland. 
The  Government  had  been  bringing  in  a  Coercion  Bill 
for  Ireland.  It  was  introduced  while  the  Corn  Bill  was 
yet  passing  through  the  House  of  Commons.  The  situa- 
tion was  cridcal.  All  the  Irish  followers  of  Mr.  O'Con- 
nell  would  be  sure  to  oppose  the  Coercion  Bill.  The 
Liberal  party,  at  least  when  out  of  office,  had  usually 
made  it  their  principle  to  oppose  Coercion  Bills  if  they 
were  not  attended  with  some  promises  of  legislative  re- 
form. The  English  Radical  members,  led  by  Mr.  Cob- 
den  and  Mr.  Bright,  were  certain  to  oppose  coercion. 
If  the  Protectionists  should  join  with  these  other  oppo- 
nents of  the  Coercion  Bill  the  fate  of  the  measure  was 
assured,  and  with  it  the  fate  of  the  Government.  This 
was  exactly  what  happened.  Eighty  Protectionists  fol- 
lowed Lord  George  Bentinck  into  the  lobby  against  the 
Bill,  in  combination  with  the  Free  Traders,  the  Whigs, 
and  the  Irish  Catholic  and  national  members.  The  divi- 
sion took  place  on  the  second  reading  of  the  Bill  on 
Thursday,  June  25,  and  there  was  a  majority  of  seventy- 
three  against  the  Ministry.  The  moment  after  Sir  Robert 
Peel  succeeded  in  passing  his  great  measure  of  Freq 
Trade  he  himself  fell  from  power.  His  political  epitaph, 
perhaps,  could  not  be  better  written  than  in  the  words 
with  which  he  closed  the  speech  that  just  preceded  his 
fall:  "  It  may  be  that  1  shall  leave  a  name  sometimes 
remembered  with  expressions  of  goodwill  in  those  places 


1846  The  Sugar  Duties  189 

which  are  the  abode  of  men  whose  lot  it  is  to  labour  and 
to  earn  their  daily  bread  by  the  sweat  of  their  brow — a 
name  remembered  with  expressions  of  goodwill  when 
they  shall  recreate  their  exhausted  strength  with  abun- 
dant and  untaxed  food,  the  sweeter  because  it  is  no 
longer  leavened  with  a  sense  of  injustice." 

With  the  fall  of  the  principle  of  the  protection  in  corn 
may  be  said  to  have  practically  fallen  the  principle  of 
Protection  in  this  country  altogether.  That  principle  was 
a  little  complicated  in  regard  to  the  sugar  duties  and  to 
the  navigation  laws.  The  sugar  produced  in  the  West 
Indian  colonies  was  allowed  to  enter  this  country  at  rates 
of  duty  much  lower  than  those  imposed  upon  the  sugar 
grown  in  foreign  lands.  The  abolition  of  slavery  in  our 
colonies  had  made  labour  there  somewhat  costly  and  dif- 
ficult to  obtain  continuously,  and  the  impression  was  that 
if  the  duties  on  foreign  sugar  were  reduced,  it  would 
tend  to  enable  those  countries  which  still  maintained  the 
slave  trade  to  compete  at  great  advantage  with  the  sugar 
grown  in  our  colonics  by  that  free  labour  to  establish 
which  England  had  but  just  paid  so  large  a  pecuniary 
fine.  Therefore  the  question  of  Free  Trade  became  in- 
volved with  that  of  free  labour ;  at  least,  so  it  seemed  to 
the  eyes  of  many  a  man  who  was  not  inclined  to  support 
the  protective  principle  in  itself.  When  it  was  put  to  him, 
whether  he  was  willing  to  push  the  Free  Trade  principle 
so  far  as  to  allow  countries  growing  sugar  by  slave  labour 
to  drive  our  free  grown  sugar  out  of  the  market,  he  was 
often  inclined  to  give  way  before  this  mode  of  putting  the 
question,  and  to  imagine  that  there  really  was  a  collision 
between  Free  Trade  and  free  labour.  Therefore  a  certain 
sentimental  plea  came  in  to  aid  the  Protectionists  in  re- 
gard to  the  sugar  duties.  Many  of  the  old  anti-slavery 
party  found  themselves  deceived  by  this  fallacy,  and  in* 


ipo  ^  Free  Trade.  1846 

clined  to  join  the  agitation  against  the  reduction  of  the 
duty  on  foreign  sugar.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  made 
tolerably  clear  that  the  labour  was  not  so  scarce  or  so 
dear  in  the  colonies  as  had  been  represented,  and  that  colo- 
nial sugar  grownby  free  labour  really  suffered  from  no  in- 
convenience except  the  fact  that  it  was  still  manufactured 
on  the  most  crude,  old  fashioned,  and  uneconomical 
methods.  Besides,  the  time  had  gone  by  when  the 
majority  of  the  English  people  could  be  convinced  that  a 
lesson  on  the  beauty  of  freedom  was  to  be  conveyed  to 
foreign  sugar-growers  and  slave-owners  by  the  means  of 
a  tax  upon  the  products  of  the'r  plantations.  Therefore 
after  a  long  and  somewhat  eager  struggle,  the  principle 
of  Free  Trade  was  allowed  to  prevail  in  regard  to  sugar. 
The  duties  on  sugar  were  made  equal.  The  growth  of 
the  sugar  plantations  was  admitted  on  the  same  terms 
into  this  country,  without  any  reference  cither  to  the  soil 
from  which  it  had  sprungortotheconditions  under  which 
it  was  grown.  It  had  for  a  long  time  been  stoutly  pro- 
claimed that  the  abolition  of  slavery  must  be  the  de- 
struction of  our  West  Indian  colonics.  Years  had 
elapsed  and  the  West  Indian  colonics  still  survived. 
Now  the  cry  of  alarm  was  taken  up  again,  and  it  was 
prophesied  that  althousjh  they  had  got  over  the  abolition 
of  slavery  they  never  could^  survive  the  equalisation  of 
the  sugar  duties.  Jamaica  certainly  had  fallen  greatly 
away  from  her  period  of  temporary  and  factitious  pros- 
perity. Jamaica  was  owned  and  managed  by  a  class  of 
proprietors  who  resembled  in  many  ways  some  of  the 
planters  of  the  States  of  America  farthest  south — of  the 
States  towards  the  mouth  of  the  Mississippi.  They  lived 
in  a  kind  of  careless  luxury,  mortgaging  their  estates  as 
deeply  as  they  possibly  could,  throwing  over  to  the 
coming  year  the  superabundant  debts  of  the  last,  and 


1 65  7-1  §49         The  Navigation  Laws.  191 

only  managing  to  keep  their  heads  above  water  so  long 
as  the  people  of  England,  by  favouring  them  with  a 
highly  protective  system,  enabled  them  still  to  compete 
against  those  who  grew  sugar  on  better  principles  and 
more  economical  plans.  The  whole  island  was  given 
over  to  neglect  and  mismanagement.  The  emancipated 
negroes  took  but  little  trouble  to  cultivate  the  plots  of 
ground  they  had  obtained,  and  were  quite  content  if  they 
could  scratch  enough  from  the  soil  to  enable  them  barely 
to  live.  Therefore  Jamaica  did  at  a  certain  time  fall  far 
below  the  level  of  her  former  seeming  prosperity. 
The  other  islands  had  been  better  managed.  Their 
estates  were  less  encumbered  by  debt,  and  they  passed 
through  each  successive  crisis  without  sustaining  any 
noticeable  injury.  In  most  of  these  islands  the  product 
increased  steadily  after  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves. 
The  negroes  then  began  to  work  earnestly,  and  education 
grew  not  greatly  but  distinctly  amongst  all  classes. 
Jamaica,  the  most  unfortunate  among  the  islands,  has 
been  constantly  the  scene  of  little  outbursts  of  more  or 
less  serious  rebellion.  As  the  late  Lord  Chief  Justice  of 
England  observed  in  a  charge  on  a  famous  occasion, 
"The  soil  of  the  island  might  seem  to  have  been  drenched 
in  blood."  But  these  disturbances,  or  insurrections,  or 
whatever  they  may  be  called,  did  not  increase  in  number 
after  the  abolition  of  slavery  and  after  the  equalisation  of 
the  sugar  duties,  but,  on  the  contrary,  decreased.  During 
our  time  only  one  considerable  disturbance  has  taken 
place  in  Jamaica,  and  in  former  years  such  tumult  was  of 
frequent  recurrence.  In  the  West  Indies  we  have,  there- 
fore, the  most  severe  teit  to  which  the  principle  of  Free 
Trade  could  well  be  subjected.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say 
that  in  the  more  fortunate  of  these  islands  it  has  esta- 
blished its  claim,  and  that  even  in  the  least  fortunate 


192  Free  Trade.  1849 

no  evidence  whatever  has  been  given  that  the  people 
would  have  been  in  any  way  the  better  off  if  the  old 
system  had  been  retained. 

The  navigation  laws  had,  too,  a  certain  external 
attraction  about  them  which  induced  many  men,  not 
actually  Protectionists,  to  believe  in  their  necessity.  The 
principle  of  the  navigation  laws  was  to  impose  such 
restrictions  of  tariff  and  otherwise  as  to  exclude  foreign 
vessels  from  taking  any  considerable  part  in  our  carry- 
ing trade.  The  law  was  first  enacted  in  Oliver  Crom- 
well's day,  at  a  time  when  the  Dutch  were  our  rivals  on 
the  waters,  and  when  it  was  thought  desirable  to  repress, 
by  protective  legislation,  the  energy  ot  such  experienced 
seamen  and  pushing  traders.  The  navigation  law  was 
modified  by  Mr.  Huskisson  in  1823,  but  only  so  far  as 
to  establish  that  which  we  now  know  so  well  as  the  prin- 
ciple of  reciprocity.  Any  nation  which  removed  restric- 
tions from  our  merchant  marine  was  favoured  by  us 
with  a  similar  concession.  The  idea  also  was,  that  these 
navigation  laws,  keeping  foreigners  out  of  our  carrying 
trade,  enabled  us  to  maintain  always  a  supply  of  sailors 
who  could  at  any  time  be  transferred  from  the  merchant 
marine  to  the  Royal  Navy,  and  thus  be  made  to  bear 
their  part  in  the  defence  of  the  country.  Of  course  the 
shipowners  themselves  upheld  the  navigation  laws,  on 
the  plea  that,  if  the  trade  were  thrown  open  by  the  with- 
drawal of  Protection,  their  chances  would  be  gone ;  that 
they  could  not  contend  against  the  foreigners  upon 
equal  terms;  that  their  interests  must  suffer,  and  that 
Great  Britain  would  in  the  end  be  a  still  severer  sufferer, 
because,  from  the  lack  of  encouragement  given  to  the 
native  traders  and  the  sailors,  England  would  one  day 
or  another  be  left  at  the  mercy  of  some  strong  power 
which,  with  wiser  regulations,  would  keep  up  her  pro- 


1837  Chartism.  193 

tective  system  and  with  it  her  naval  strength.  Never- 
theless, the  shipowners,  and  the  Protectionists,  and  those 
who  raised  the  alarm  cry  about  England's  naval  de- 
fences, were  unable  to  maintain  their  sophisms  in  the 
face  of  growing  education,  and  of  the  impulse  given  by 
the  adoption  of  Free  Trade.  In  1849  ''^^  navigation 
laws  were  abolished.  We  believe  there  are  very  few 
shipowners  who  will  not  now  admit  that  the  prosperity 
of  their  trade  has  grown  immensely,  in  place  of  suffering 
from  the  introduction  of  the  free  trade  principle  in  navi- 
gation as  well  as  in  corn  and  sugar. 


CHAPTER   XIII. 

REFORM   WITHSTANDS   REVOLUTION, 

While  all  these  reforms  were  going  on,  England  was 
not  without  revolutionary  throbbings.  The  movement 
which  we  call  Chartism  was,  for  a  while,  one  that  seemed 
likely  to  be  dangerous.  It  began  at  a  great  Radical 
meeting  held  at  Birmingham  a  few  weeks  after  the  coro- 
nation of  Queen  Victoria.  It  sprang  into  existence 
chiefly  in  consequence  of  a  formal  declaration  made  by 
the  leaders  of  the  Liberal  party  in  Parliament,  that 
they  did  not  propose  to  push  reform  any  further.  We 
have  already  shown  how  the  Reform  Bill  passed  by  Lord 
Grey  and  Lord  John  Russell  left  the  working  classes 
almost  entirely  out  of  the  franchise.  It  took  away  the 
electoral  monopoly  from  the  aristocracy,  and  transferred 
it  to  a  combination  of  aristocracy  and  plutocracy.  It  not 
only  did  not  confer  political  emancipation  on  the  working 
classes,  but  in  many  places  it  abolished  the  peculiar 
franchise  which  enabled  the  working  man  to  be  a  voter. 
In  some  places,  such,  for  example,  as  the  town  of  Preston, 
O 


194  Reform  wiihstands  Revolution.      1837-39 

in  Lancashire,  there  was  a  system  of  fancy  franchise 
■which  almost  amounted  to  universal  suffrage.  The 
Reform  Bill  effaced  all  these  peculiarities  of  suffrage, 
admitted  the  middle  classes,  and  the  middle  classes 
only,  to  a  share  of  the  law-making  power,  and  shut  out 
the  working  men  altogether.  This  was  the  more  exas- 
perating to  the  working  classes,  because  the  Reform 
Bill  had  been  carried  in  the  face  of  so  much  resistance, 
mainly  by  virtue  of  their  support  and  their  strength. 
Almost  immediately  after  the  opening  of  the  first  Par- 
liament of  Queen  Victoria's  reign,  a  Radical  member 
of  the  House  of  Commons  moved,  as  an  amendment 
to  the  Address,  a  resolution  in  favour  of  the  Ballot  and 
of  a  shorter  duration  of  Parliaments.  No  more  than 
twenty  members  supported  this  amendment,  although  it 
contained  only  the  recommendations  which  men  like 
Lord  Durham  a  few  years  before  were  accustomed  to 
propose.  During  the  discussion  which  took  place,  Lord 
John  Russell  declared  distinctly  against  all  attempts  to 
re-open  the  reform  question.  The  disappointment  felt 
throughout  the  country,  and  especially  amongst  the 
working  classes,  was  very  great.  They  had  been  in 
hopes  that  the  Reform  Bill,  which  they  helped  to  pass, 
was  to  be  the  means  by  which  much  greater  changes 
more  directly  affecting  their  condition  were  to  be  intro- 
duced into  the  Parliamentary  system.  To  their  surprise 
they  now  heard  one  of  the  great  leaders  of  reform  de- 
claring that  to  push  the  movement  any  further  would  be 
a  breach  of  faith  towards  those  who  helped  to  carry 
Lord  Grey's  Bill.  Lord  John  Russell  was  doubtless 
right  enough  in  thinking  the  moment  highly  inopportune 
for  pushing  the  reform  principle  any  further.  Forward 
movements  in  political  reform  are  always,  in  a  country 
like  this,  followed  by  a  season  of  reaction.     The  House 


1837  Chartism.  195 

of  Commons  was  already  beginning  to  feel  the  influence 
of  this  operation.  But,  at  the  same  time,  it  was  hard 
that  working  men,  who  had  helped  so  stoutly  to  make 
the  reform  movement  a  success,  should  be  told  bluntly 
that  its  influence  was  to  stop  short  of  the  only  measures 
which  could  in  any  way  afi"cct  their  condition.  A  few 
Liberal  members  of  Parliament,  who  professed  strong 
Radical  opinions,  held  a  conference  shortly  afterwards 
with  some  of  the  leaders  of  the  working  men,  and  it 
appears  that  at  this  conference  the  document  which  was 
aftei-wards  known  as  the  People's  Charter  was  drawn  up 
and  agreed  to.  O'Connell,  it  is  said,  gave  it  its  name. 
"  There  is  your  Charter,"  he  said  to  the  Secretary  of 
the  Working  Men's  Association  ;  "  agitate  for  that,  and 
never  be  content  with  anything  else." 

The  Charter  was  not,  after  all,  a  very  formidable 
document  It  insisted  on  six  "points,"  as  they  were 
called.  Manhood  suff'ragc,  cr  as  it  was  then  called, 
universal  suffrage  (but  its  promoters  never  thought  of 
the  franchise  for  women),  annual  Parliaments,  vote  by 
ballot,  abolition  of  the  property  qualification  for  the  elec- 
tion of  a  Member  of  Parliament,  payment  of  Members, 
and  the  division  of  the  country  into  equal  electoral 
districts,  were  the  "points''  of  the  famous  Charter. 
Around  the  agitation  thus  got  up,  there  gathered  all  the 
discontented  amongst  all  classes  of  working  men.  Some 
men  of  great  ability  and  great  earnestness,  some  men  of 
more  ability  than  earnestness,  took  the  leadership  of  the 
movement.  It  had  its  orators,  its  poets,  its  prophets,  its 
martyrs.  Misery  and  discontent  were,  however,  its 
strongest  inspiration.  The  Anti-Corn  Law  rhymes  of 
Ebenezer  Elliott  will  show  how  what  he  calls  the  Bread 
Tax  became  identified,  and  justly,  in  the  minds  of  work- 
ing men,  with  the  whole  system  of  political  and  economi- 


196  Reform  withstands  Revolution.       1841-44 

cal  legislation  which  was  kept  up  for  the  benefit  of  a  few. 
For  them  the  blessings  of  the  British  Constitution  seemed 
to  mean  only  incessant  exhausting  work,  miserable  wages, 
and  scanty  food.  The  Government  endeavoured  to 
repress  Chartist  meetings  and  Chartist  disturbances  by' 
force.  They  prosecuted  some  of  the  spokesmen  and 
leaders  of  the  Chartist  movement,  and  Henry  Vincent,  a 
man  ofgood  character  and  a  certain  amount  of  eloquence, 
was  imprisoned  at  Newport  in  Wales.  His  imprison- 
ment was  the  cause  of  the  famous  attempt  of  Frost, 
Williams,  and  Jones,  which,  beginning  with  a  scheme 
merely  for  the  release  of  Vincent  from  jail,  grew  into 
a  sort  of  insurrection.  A  conflict  took  place  between  the 
Chartists  and  the  soldiery  and  the  police,  in  which  the 
Chartists  were  dispersed  with  a  loss  of  eight  or  ten  men 
and  fifty  or  sixty  wounded.  Frost  and  his  companions 
were  tried  on  a  charge  of  high  treason,  were  found 
guilty,  and  sentenced  to  death,  but  the  sentence  was 
commuted  to  one  of  transportation  for  life.  Their 
conviction  did  not  put  a  stop  to  the  Chartist  agitation. 
On  the  contrary,  Chartism  seemed  to  have  received  a  new 
life  and  a  new  direction  since  the  failure  of  the  attempt 
at  Newport.  A  new  race  of  Chartists  began  to  spring  up. 
The  convictions  of  Frost  and  his  companions  stirred  up 
sympathy  amongst  men  who,  up  to  that  time,  had  not 
even  had  their  attention  turned  to  the  movement. 

About  the  same  time  that  the  Chartist  disturbances 
were  going  on  in  this  country  the  repeal  agitation  was 
spreading  over  Ireland.  The  repeal  movement  was 
started  by  Daniel  O'ConncU,  with  the  object  of  dissolving 
the  tie  which  bound  two  countries  into  one  system  of 
Government.  O'Conncll  was  a  man  of  extraordinary 
eloquence,  energy,  and  ability.  He  was  as  shrewd  in 
council  as  he  was  commanding  in  speech.  He  has  hardly 


1842-44  TTie  Repeal  Agitation.  197 

ever  had  a  rival  as  a  popular  orator.  The  universal 
opinion  of  his  time  pronounced  him  to  be  the  greatest 
platform  speaker  of  that  day,  and  although  he  entered 
the  House  of  Commons  late  in  life,  when  he  was  almost 
midway  between  fifty  and  sixty,  he  yet  achieved  a  repu- 
tation in  that  highly-cultured  assembly  scarcely  inferior, 
if  inferior  at  all,  to  the  fame  he  had  won  out  of  doors. 
It  was  mainly  through  his  energy  and  determination  that 
Catholic  emancipation  was  at  last  forced  upon  a  reluc- 
tant Ministry.  After  Catholic  emancipation  he  was  dis- 
appointed with  the  course  the  Whigs  were  taking,  and 
he  set  himself  to  organize  an  agitation  for  the  repeal  of 
the  legislative  union  between  England  and  Ireland.  The 
Act  of  Union,  whatever  its  objects  might  have  been, 
was  undoubtedly  brought  about  by  measures  and  means 
over  which,  to  use  Carlyle's  words,  "moralities  not  a  few 
must  shriek  aloud."  The  most  audacious  and  wholesale 
system  of  bribery  had  been  employed  to  accomplish  the 
Union.  Peers  were  made  and  votes  were  bought  as 
rapidly  and  as  openly  as  if  there  was  no  need  even  for 
pretending  to  disguise  the  purpose  of  these  transactions. 
Lord  Cornwallis,  who  conducted  the  negotiations  at  the 
time  in  Ireland,  again  and  again  expressed  to  his  friends 
his  disgust  and  loathing  for  the  work  he  had  to  do.  It  is 
therefore  easy  to  understand  that  O'Connell  found  strong 
feeling  enough  againstthe  Union  already  in  the  minds  of 
his  countrymen  to  admit  of  his  easily  rousing  them  up 
into  a  fury  against  it.  He  organized  a  great  system  of 
monster  meetings.  He  may  be  regarded  as  the  author 
and  inventor  of  that  practice  of  modern  agitation  which 
has  now  taken  possession  of  the  whole  English-speaking 
world.  He  gave  something  of  a  military  appearance  fo 
the  crowds  who  attended  his  meetings.  They  marched 
in  martial  array  with  bands  and  banners.     It  is  not  likely 


198  Reform  withstands  Revolution.      1842-44 

that  O'Connell  ever  intended  anything  like  an  armed  re- 
beUion  ;  but  it  is  probable  that  he  was  anxious  to  make 
the  Government  believe  that  he  had  the  force  at  his  back 
whenever  he  chose  to  call  it  into  action.  He  had  an 
entire  command  of  the  peasantry,  of  the  priests,  and  of  the 
artisans  in  the  towns,  and  of  most  of  the  Catholic  traders 
and  shopkeepers  of  whatever  class  in  the  towns  also. 
Nobody  in  Ireland,  before  his  time,  had  anything  like  the 
same  command  of  the  whole  national  public  opinion  of 
the  countr)'.  Had  he  but  held  up  his  hand  at  any 
moment  he  could  have  made  a  rebellion.  This,  how- 
ever, was  not  O'Connell's  policy.  He  hoped,  by  a  fre- 
quent display  of  popular  strength,  to  force  the  Govern- 
ment into  the  concession  of  the  claim  which  he  made. 
It  would  not  have  suited  his  purpose  either  to  begin  a 
rebellion  or  to  have  it  distinctly  known  that  he  never  in- 
tended to  begin  one.  The  Government,  at  last  taking 
alarm  at  his  menacing  demonstrations,  prohibited  one  of 
his  monster  meetings.  O'Connell  acted  with  great 
promptitude.  He  instantly  issued  a  proclamation  of  his 
own  advising  the  people  to  disperse  in  quiet.  Always 
obedient  to  his  command  the  immense  crowds  which  had 
been  pouring  into  the  place  of  meeting  broke  up  quietly 
and  went  to  their  homes  again.  But  the  course  taken 
by  O'Connell  was  fatal  to  his  popularity.  With  the 
young  men  especially  it  wore  away  his  influence.  Most 
of  them  fully  believed  that  he  intended  an  armed 
struggle  at  some  time  or  another,  and  when  they  found 
now,  by  his  own  positive  assurance  and  by  his  own 
action,  that  he  had  no  such  purpose  their  interest  in  the 
movement  faded  away.  His  judgment,  of  course,  was 
irtuch  shrewder  and  better  than  theirs,  but  their  youth- 
ful enthusiasm  could  not  abide  disappointment.  O'Con- 
nell was  afterwards  prosecuted  for  seditious  speaking, 


1844  Tinal  of  C  Connell.  199 

tried,  found  guilty,  and  sentenced  to  fine  and  imprison- 
ment. He  appealed  to  the  House  of  Lords  against  the 
sentence,  on  the  ground  that  jury  lists  had  been  prepared 
in  such  a  manner  as  to  insure  his  conviction.  A  majority 
of  the  House  of  Lords  affirmed  that  the  judgment  ought 
not  to  be  sustained.  The  occasion  was  remarkable 
because,  among  other  reasons,  it  marked  a  new  chapter 
in  the  practice  of  the  House  of  Lords.  The  constitution 
of  the  House  of  Lords  recognised  at  that  time,  and  for  a 
longtime  afterwards,  no  difference  between  the  law  lords 
and  the  other  peers  in  voting  on  any  question  of  appeal. 
The  lay  peers  indeed  hardly  ever  exercised  their  right 
to  vote.  But  they  had  the  right  to  do  so  and  there  were 
some  cases  in  which  they  had  put  it  into  practice  and 
voted  on  appeal  just  as  if  they  had  been  masters  of  the 
law.  If  the  lay  lords  had  exercised  their  right  in  the 
case  of  O'Connell,  it  is  certain  that  the  decision  of  the 
court  below  would  have  been  maintained.  No  one  had 
ever  denounced  the  House  of  Lords  with  more  bitterness 
and  virulence  than  O'Connell.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is 
certain  that  the  sincere  opinion  of  a  majority  of  the 
House  of  Lords  was  that  O'Connell  well  deserved  his 
condemnation  and  his  sentence.  The  moment  was 
critical.  Nothing  could  possibly  have  had  a  more  evil 
effect  on  public  opinion  in  Ireland  than  the  decision  of  a 
question  purely  of  law  by  the  votes  of  peers  who  were 
not  lawyers,  and  against  a  man  who  had  made  himself 
their  most  conspicuous  personal  enemy.  Lord  Wharn- 
clifTe  suddenly  arose  and  appealed  to  the  wiser  judgment 
and  calmer  temper  of  his  brother  peers.  He  begged  of 
them  not  to  take  a  course  which  might  leave  it  open  to 
O'Connell  and  to  everyone  to  say  that  political  and 
personal  feeling  had  governed  a  judicial  decision  of  the 
House  of  Lords.    Just  before  Lord  Wharncliffe  spoke 


200  Reform  withstands  Revolution.  1844 

one  lay  peer  at  least  had  declared  that  he  would  insisx 
upon  his  right  to  vote.  Several  others  gave  it  to  be 
understood  that  they  were  determined  to  follow  the  ex- 
ample. Lord  Wharncliffe's  timely  interposition  had  a 
happy  effect.  All  the  lay  peers  tacitly  acknowledged  the 
justice  of  his  advice.  They  withdrew  from  the  House 
and  left  the  decision,  according  to  the  usual  fashion,  in 
the  hands  of  the  law  lords.  The  majority  of  these,  as 
we  have  said,  were  against  the  judgment  of  the  court 
below,  and  O'Connell  and  his  companions  were  set  at 
liberty.  The  lay  peers  never  again  voted  on  a  question 
of  judicial  appeal,  so  long  as  the  appellate  jurisdiction 
of  the  House  of  Lords  was  still  allowed  to  remain  in 
their  hands  after  the  traditional  and  anomalous  fashion. 

The  appeal  agitation  faded.  It  gave  way,  however, 
only  to  a  more  impassioned  and  more  energetic  associa- 
tion. This  was  the  Young  Ireland  confederation.  A 
number  of  eager  and  passionate  young  men,  weary  and 
impatient  of  O'Connell's  policy,  broke  away  from  him 
shortly  before  his  death,  and  founded  an  association  of 
their  own.  It  gradually  and  rapidly  glided  into  some- 
thing like  rebellion.  It  would  probably  have  gone  that 
way  in  any  case,  because  there  could  be  no  succession 
to  O'Connell's  movement  which  would  not  be  an  anti- 
climax unless  it  assumed  the  open  form  of  rebellion. 
But  the  Young  Ireland  movement,  like  the  Chartist 
movement  in  England,  was  inflamed  with  new  life  and 
passion  and  fire  by  the  outbreak  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion of  1848. 

The  year  1848  was  a  year  of  revolution.  The  flame 
which  broke  out  in  France  spread  over  the  whole  Conti- 
nent. From  Madrid  to  Moscow,  from  Paris  to  Constan- 
tinople, the  movement  was  felt.  Thrones  were  coming 
down  in  all  directions.     Whole  systems  were  crashing 


1848  Young  Ireland.  aoi 

like  old  houses  in  some  ancient  quarters  of  a  city  in  a 
night  of  storm.  The  revolutionary  impulse  began  in 
France,  but  of  the  fatuity  with  which  Louis  Philippe 
and  his  Minister  were  striving  to  carry  restriction  and 
repression  too  far.  The  fall  of  Guizot  and  of  Louis 
Philippe  with  him  was  distinctly  owing  to  the  cause  to 
which  Sir  Robert  Peel  ascribed  it.  Peel  heard  in  the 
House  of  Commons  from  Mr.  Joseph  Hume  the  news  of 
the  fate  of  the  French  Monarchy,  and  quietly  remarked 
that  that  was  what  came  of  trying  to  govern  a  country 
on  too  narrow  a  basis  of  representation.  M.  Guizot,  a 
man  of  great  ability  and  sound  judgment  as  an  historian, 

.  was  singularly  perverse  and  narrow  when  he  came  to 
deal  with  actual  systems  and  living  men.  It  was  his 
conviction  that  he  could  manage  to  govern  France  by 
means  of  a  restricted  principle  of  representation,  so  that 
the  country  should  have  all  the  appearance  of  a  repre- 
sentative system  while  in  reality  it  was  ruled  by  the 
Minister  and  the  Court.  He  pushed  his  doctrine  too  far, 
and  the  result  was  a  popular  uprising,  which  complete 
concession  might  have  satisfied  in  time,  but  which,  com- 
plete concession  being  denied,  broke  out  before  long  into 
revolution.  Louis  Philippe  fled  from  Paris  and  became 
an  exile  in  England.  It  was  said  and  believed  for  a  long 
time  that  he  owed  his  fall  from  the  throne  to  his  reluct- 
ance to  use  forcible  measures  for  the  repression  of  the 
popular  rising.  Recent  publications,  however,  and  re- 
cent accounts  of  conversations  with  M.  Thiers,  show 
that  there  is  no  truth  in  the  report  which  ascribed  to  the 
late  King  of  the  French  such  a  chivalrous  or  quixotic 
sentiment  of  humanity.  He  would  have  suppressed 
the  revolution  by  any  exertion  of  military  force  and  at 
any  cost  of  human  life  if  he  had  only  seen  his  way  in 
time. 


202  Reform  withstands  Revolution.  1848 

After  the  proclamation  of  the  Republic  in  France,  the 
revolutionary  spirit  flew  over  the  whole  of  Europe.  It 
broke  out  in  Prussia,  in  Austria,  in  Italy — almost  every- 
where. The  popular  rising  in  Austria  proved  so  powerful 
that  for  a  time  it  was  thought  there  was  little  hope  of  the 
then  reigning  Emperor  being  able  to  maintain  his  place 
in  Vienna.  Venice  proclaimed  herself  a  Republic,  and 
under  the  leadership  of  the  noble  and  purc-hcarted 
Daniel  Manin,  held  her  own  for  no  inconsiderable  time. 
Charles  Albert,  the  King  of  Sardinia,  was  compelled  to 
put  himself  at  the  head  of  the  popular  movement  in  Italy, 
although  he  had  himself  at  onetime  used  stern  measures 
for  the  repression  of  a  popular  uprising.  The  Austrians 
were  for  a  while  virtually  dispossessed  of  the  Lombard 
provinces.  Pope  Pius  IX.,  who  had  at  first  shown  a 
strong  inclination  to  become  the  leader  of  the  national 
movement  against  the  Austrians  and  foreigners  of  all 
kinds,  suddenly  drew  back  before  the  danger  of  blood- 
shed and  the  difficulty  of  dealing  with  a  great  revolu- 
tionary crisis,  and  the  immediate  result  was  that  revolu- 
don  broke  out  in  Rome  itself.  The  Pope  had  to  take 
refuge  in  Gaeta.  in  the  dominions  of  the  King  of  Naples, 
and  a  Republic  was  proclaimed  in  Rome  under  a  trium- 
virate, with  Joseph  Mazzini  at  its  head.  A  rising  took 
place  in  Berlin,  and  the  streets  of  the  city  were  drenched 
in  blood.  A  revolt  broke  out  in  Baden,  and  was  sup- 
pressed not  without  some  difficulty  by  the  troops  of  the 
King  of  Prussia.  Hungary,  which  had  long  been  mur- 
muring against  the  restriction  of  her  ancient  liberties 
and  the  abolition  of  her  time-honored  constitution  by 
Austria,  rose  in  a  gigantic  rebellion  against  the  house  of 
Hapsburg.  On  many  great  battle-fields  the  Hungarians 
met  the  Austrians,  and  were  the  victors  ;  and  it  may 
be  almost  taken  for  granted  that    Hungary  would  have 


1848  T%e  Year  of  Revolutions.  203 

asserted  successfully  her  entire  independence  of  Austria 
at  that  time,  but  that  Nicholas,  the  Emperor  of  Russia, 
seeing  his  own  frontiers  threatened  by  the  rush  of  the 
revolutionary  movement,  intervened  on  behalf  of  Austria, 
and  by  means  of  his  enormous  forces  succeeded  in  de- 
feating the  Hungarians  in  the  field,  and  in  finally  com- 
pelling their  submission.  Their  dictator,  Kossuth,  took 
refuge  at  first  in  Turkey,  and  afterwards  came  to  England. 
The  King  of  the  Belgians  escaped  the  storm  of  revolution 
by  the  courage  with  which  he  confronted  it.  In  the 
words  of  Hamlet,  he  may  be  said  to  have  "  taken  arms 
against  a  sea  of  troubles,''  but  not  arms  in  the  military 
sense.  He  encountered  the  difficulty  by  announcing 
from  his  palace  windows  that  he  had  accepted  the  Crown 
of  Belgium  as  the  free  gift  of  the  Belgian  people,  and 
that  he  was  ready  at  any  moment  to  put  it  down  and  to 
leave  thecountry  if  the  Belgian  people  no  longer  wished 
him  to  retain  his  place.  The  result  was  what  might 
have  been  expected  from  an  attitude  so  chivalrous  and 
kingly.  The  Belgians  insisted  on  his  retaining  the  Crown ; 
and  he  continued  to  be,  to  his  death,  one  of  the  most 
popular  sovereigns  in  Europe. 

The  movement  on  the  Continent  proved  to  be  prema- 
ture. It  was  repressed  in  every  single  instance,  with  the 
exception  of  France  alone,  and  even  there  the  repression 
was  but  put  off  for  a  year  or  two.  The  movement  in 
Northern  Italy  was  after  a  while  completely  crushed 
out.  Charles  Albert  was  defeated  hopelessly  and  finally 
at  Novara,  and  he  shortly  afterwards  thought  it  wise 
to  abdicate  his  throne  in  favor  of  his  son  Victor 
Emmanuel,  and  retired  to  exile  in  Portugal,  where  he 
died.  We  have  described  the  fate  of  the  Hungarian 
movement.  The  French  Government  sent  troops  to 
Rome,  and  afterwards  intervened  against  the  Revolution 


204  Reform  withstands  Revolution.  1848 

and  for  the  restoration  of  Pope  Pius.  Venice  was  re- 
captured by  the  Austrians,  and  Manin  became  an  exile. 
For  no  inconsiderable  time  it  seemed  as  if  reaction  had 
obtained  complete  control  of  the  continental  peoples, 
and  as  if  the  day  of  constitutional  freedom  was  indefi- 
nitely postponed. 

Meanwhile,  how  did  England  fare  ?  England's  history 
during  all  that  crisis  is  a  striking  illustration  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  principle  of  reform  acts  as  a  rampart 
against  revolution.  The  flame  of  continental  revolt 
spread  itself  to  this  country  and  to  Ireland.  In  England 
the  Chartist  movement  sprang  up  into  fierce,  and  what 
seemed  at  onetime  very dangerousactivity.  In  Ireland, 
the  young  men,  clever,  brilliant,  sincere,  young  men  for 
the  most  part,  who  had  seceded  from  the  leadership  of 
O  Connell,  began  open  preparations  for  an  armed  rebel- 
lion. The  Chartist  movement  burst  like  a  bubble,  on 
Kennington  Common,  on  April  10,  1848.  The  Young 
Ireland  party  were  hurried  into  a  premature  outbreak  in 
the  summer  of  the  same  year,  and  it  was  suppressed 
almost  before  the  Irish  population  in  general  knew  that 
it  had  begun.  Neither  in  England  nor  in  Ireland  did 
the  disturbance  call  for  a  single  charge  of  cavalry.  The 
explanation  of  all  this  is  clear.  It  is  not  that  there  were 
no  grievances  in  England  and  Ireland  to  justify  the 
strongest  protest.  There  were  still  grievances  that 
would  have  been  intolerable  if  men  could  have  supposed 
that  they  were  likely  to  last.  There  were  grievances 
which  would  well  have  warranted  a  revolutionary  up- 
rising against  them,  if  it  could  have  been  supposed  that 
there  was  no  other  way  of  getting  rid  of  them.  But  all 
reasonable  men  knew  that  they  could  be  got  rid  of;  that 
only  time  and  patience  and  the  working  of  public  opinion 
were  needed  for  their  removal.     The  reforms  already 


1848  Kennington  Common.  205 

accomplished  were  guarantee  of  further  reforms,  and  the 
people  knew  that  they  could  afford  to  wait. 

The  reform  movement,  which  was  conducted  to  prac- 
tical statesmanship  by  Lord  Grey  and  Lord  John  Russell, 
went  on,  making  its  influence  felt  in  all  directions. 
Religious  equality,  commercial  freedom,  popular  educa- 
tion, the  opening  of  universities  to  all  sects,  the  extension 
of  the  suffrage — these  are  some  of  the  operations  of  the 
principle  which  was  put  into  force  when  the  Reform  Bill 
of  i832was  passed.  There  haveof  course  beenintervals 
of  reaction,  but  the  progress  of  reform  has  been  steady 
on  the  whole.  Since  1848  we  have  never  heard  even  a 
whisper  of  domestic  disturbance  in  England.  Every 
reasonable  man  knows  that  the  work  of  pacification  in 
Ireland  is  only  a  question  of  just  and  generous  legisla- 
tion. 

Perhaps  we  cannot  bring  our  account  of  this  epoch  of 
reform  more  fittingly  to  a  close  than  with  the  death  of 
Sir  Robert  Peel.  On  the  morning  of  June  29,  1850,  Sir 
Robert  Peel  left  the  House  of  Commons  shortly  before 
four  o'clock.  He  went  homeforrest,  but  it  could  only  be 
rest  for  a  brief  interval.  He  had  to  go  to  a  meeting  of 
the  commissioners  of  the  Great  Exhibition  at  twelve. 
He  went  to  the  meeting  and  bore  a  part  in  the  discussion. 
He  returned  home  for  a  short  time  and  then  went  out 
for  a  ride  in  the  park.  As  he  was  riding  up  Constitution 
Hill,  he  stopped  to  talk  to  a  lady,  the  daughter  of  a 
friend.  His  horse  suddenly  started  and  flung  him  off. 
Peel  clung  to  the  bridle.  The  horse  fell  with  its  knees 
on  his  shoulders.  He  received  such  injuries  as  to  render 
his  recovery  impossible.  He  lingered  for  two  or  three 
days,  sometimes  conscious,  sometimes  unconscious,  and 
he  died  toward  midnight  on  July  2.  His  death  closed 
appropriately  a  great  period  of  reform.     Peel  was  a  re- 


2o6  Reform  withstands  Revolution.  1850 

former  forced  into  reform.  He  had  not  accepted  it  of 
hisown  impulse.  We  find  him  through  the  greater  part 
of  his  career  resisting  every  proposal  for  change  in  the 
beginning,  and  yet  becoming  himself  identified  with  some 
of  the  greatest  changes  in  the  political  history  of  the 
time.  Lord  Bcaconsfield  speaks  of  him  as  a  great 
member  of  Parliament,  and  uses  the  phrase  in  a  manner 
which  seems  to  imply  that  in  Lord  Beaconsfield's  opinion 
he  was  that  and  that  alone.  But  Sir  Robert  Peel  was 
undoubtedly  a  great  minister  of  state  and  even  a  great 
statesman  as  well.  He  was  a  profoundly  conscientious 
man.  His  reason  and  conscience  were  alike  active  and 
alike  exercised  command  over  him.  He  was  one  of  the 
small  number  of  statesmen  who  are  willing  to  renounce 
their  dearest  opinions,  the  traditions  of  their  youth,  the 
prejudices  of  their  manhood,  if  their  reason  can  only  be 
convinced  that  other  opinions  are  just.  Sir  Robert  Peel's 
great  change  on  the  question  of  the  corn  laws  does  as 
much  credit  to  his  intellect  as  to  his  conscience.  He 
could  not  close  his  mind  against  the  arguments  of  the 
free  traders,  and  his  conscience  would  not  allow  him  to 
shape  his  political  course  in  any  other  way  but  as  his 
reason  directed.  Sir  Robert  Peel  was  not  indeed  a  man 
of  original  genius.  His  greatest  triumphs  were  accom- 
plished by  the  adaptation  of  other  men's  ideas.  No  two 
men,  perhaps,  could  seem  to  be  less  alike  than  Peel  and 
Mirabeau,  and  yet  Peel  and  Mirabeau  resembled  each 
other  in  this,  that  each  had  a  marvellous  power  of  assimi- 
lating the  ideas  of  others  and  putting  them  into  action 
in  practical  politics.  Peel  was  a  great  administrator  and 
a  great  Parliamentary  debater,  and  he  had  so  thorough 
an  understanding  of  all  the  principles  of  finance  that 
he  first  and  last  won  for  the  conservative  party  the 
repute  of  being  the  sound  economists  and  trustworthy 


1850  Death  of  Sir  Robert  Peel.  207 

financiers  of  the  country.  Before  his  time  and  after  his 
time,  Whig  or  Liberal  Governments  have  always  claimed, 
and  been  allowed,  the  credit  of  financial  skill  and  success. 
Sir  Robert  Peel,  in  his  prime,  carried  the  sceptre  of 
finance  fairly  over  to  the  Conservative  ranks,  and  kept  it 
there  until  his  death.  He  was  a  man  of  austere  cha- 
racter and  somewhat  chilly  temperament,  awkward  and 
shy  in  manner.  People  thought  him  proud  where  he  was 
only  reserved.  He  was  really  full  of  warmth  and  generous 
feeling,  but  his  sensitive  character  led  him  to  disguise 
his  emotions,  and  this  contrast  between  his  strong  feel- 
ings and  his  want  of  demonstrativeness,  gave  him  a 
certain  artificial  manner  which  seemed  merely  awkward. 
His  real  genius  and  character  came  out  in  the  House  of 
Commons  and  in  debate.  He  was  not  an  orator  of  the 
highest  class.  He  had  little  passion  and  almost  no 
imagination,  but  his  style  was  clear,  strong,  and  flowing. 
His  speeches  are  full  of  various  argument  and  appropriate 
illustration.  They  were  the  very  perfection  of  good 
sense  and  high  principle,  clothed  in  the  most  impressive 
language.  At  the  time  of  his  death  Peel  was  still  in  the 
fullest  possession  of  all  his  faculties,  both  of  mind  and 
body.  He  was  little  more  than  sixty-two  years  of  age, 
and  it  seemed  almost  certain  that  he  had  a  great  career 
still  before  him.  He  would  probably  have  become  Prime 
Minister  again,  or  else  he  would  have  filled  a  post  still 
more  important  than  that  occupied  for  many  years  by  the 
Duke  of  Wellington,  that  of  impartial  adviser  to  the 
Sovereign,  no  matter  what  party  happened  to  be  in 
power,  trusted  alike  by  the  Sovereign,  by  parties,  and  by 
the  people.  He  would  have  filled  this  place  better  than 
the  Duke  of  Wellington  did,  for  although  no  man  could 
be  more  simply  sincere  than  was  the  Duke  in  his  patriotic 
desire  to  serve  his  Sovereign,  Peel  had  a  mind  so  far 


2o8  A  Survey,  Political  and  Social.  X850 

superior  in  flexibility  and  in  strength,  that  he  would  have 
known,  what  the  Duke  of  Wellington  did  not  always 
know,  how  to  reconcile  devotion  to  the  Sovereign  with 
loyalty  to  the  people,  and  the  recognition  of  new  ideas 
and  new  political  conditions.  If  we  are  not  to  class  Peel 
amongst  great  ministers  of  the  first  rank,  it  is,  perhaps, 
only  because,  during  his  time,  England  was  not  put  to 
any  trial  of  the  kind  that  calls  out  the  greatest  faculties 
of  statesmanship,  and  wins  for  men  a  name  with  the 
foremost  in  history. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

A  SURVEY,  POLITICAL   AND  SOCIAL. 

England's  imperial  responsibilities  grow  greater  year 
by  year  with  the  continued  increase  of  her  colonial  pos- 
sessions. She  has,  however,  wisely  provided  against  the 
difficulty  of  governing  far  distant  colonies  from  a  central 
point  in  Westminster,  by  gradually  allowing  to  each  of 
her  great  colonies  a  system  of  self-government.  Not 
long  after  the  accession  of  Queen  Victoria,  Lord  Durham, 
sent  out  as  commissioner  to  endeavour  to  reorganise 
the  affairs  of  Canada  after  a  rebellion  there,  succeeded 
in  layingthe  foundations  of  a  system  of  self-government, 
which  has  gradually  been  expanding  until  it  has  taken  in 
nearly  all  the  British  possessions  in  North  America  under 
one  federation.  The  colonies  in  Australasia  have  also 
been  gradually  brought  up  to  this  system  of  self-govern- 
ment. New  South  Wales,  the  oldest  of  the  group,  came 
into  constitutional  and  political  life  about  the  time  at 
which  this  history  closes.  Victoria  was  separated  from 
New  South  Wales  in  1851,  and  brought  her  constitutional 
system  into  working  order  a  few  years  after.  The  other 
colonies  followed  by  degrees.     The  discovery  of  gold  in 


1850  Australia.  209 

Australia  was  an  event  of  immense  importance  both  to 
the  colony  and  to  England.  It  sent  a  sudden  rush  of 
emigration  from  all  countries  out  to  Victoria,  and  the 
result  was,  that  in  a  very  few  years  the  great  and  flourish- 
ing city  of  Melbourne,  grew  up  on  a  shore  that  had  pre- 
viously been  only  a  landing  place  for  men  pushing  their 
way  inland  to  cultivate  farms  and  raise  cattle  and  sheep. 
Gold  was  discovered  in  Australia  in  1851,  and  had  been 
discovered  in  California  three  or  four  years  before. 
Since  then  gold  has  been  found  in  many  othervof  our 
colonies,  and  always  with  the  same  result  of  directfrig,  a 
sudden  emigration  to  the  place,  and  leading  to  the  birth 
of  great  communities  and  the  building  of  large  town«t. 
Independently,  however,  of  the  discovery  of  gold  emi- 
gration to  the  colonies  had  greatly  developed  during  the 
years  which  we  have  surveyed.  The  English  language 
thus  spreads  all  over  the  world,  and  promises  before  long 
to  be  the  tongue  most  common  amongst  civilized  nations. 
To  the  great  Indian  Empire  enough  of  attention  had  not 
been  paid  for  many  years  by  statesmen  and  the  public 
at  home.  Our  public  men  here  knew  but  little  of  the 
struggle  of  races  and  conflict  of  interests  which  were 
going  on  in  India.  Territories  were  annexed,  rulers 
were  deposed,  and  successions  were  cut  ofT  rather  heed- 
lessly from  time  to  time,  by  Indian  viceroys  obeying 
perhaps  the  spur  of  immediate  expediency  rather  than 
keeping  their  eyes  fixed  upon  the  responsibilities  of  the 
future.  The  English  people  were  therefore  taken  wholly 
by  surprise  when  the  great  Indian  Mutiny  broke  out,  a 
few  years  after  the  period  at  which  we  have  now  arrived, 
and  brought  about,  as  one  result,  the  reorganisation  of 
the  system  of  government  in  India  and  the  abolition 
of  the  old  East  India  Company. 

About  the  time  of  Peel's  death  the  Eastern  Question 
P 


2IO  A  Survey,  Political  and  Social.  1850 

began  to  occupy  the  attention  of  Europe.  What  is  the 
Eastern  Question  ?  It  is,  in  plain  words,  the  question. 
What  is  to  become  of  the  dominions  now  occupied  by  the 
Turkish  Government  in  Europe  and  in  Asia.  The  Turks 
settled  themselves  in  Europe  in  the  fifteenth  century. 
They  captured  Cons' antinople,  overran  a  great  part  of 
the  south-west  of  the  Continent,  and  pushed  their  inva- 
sion so  far  as  to  threaten  Vienna,  the  Capital  of  Austria. 
They  obtained  what  seemed  for  a  long  time  a  secure 
holding  of  all,  or  nearly  all,  the  dominions  of  the  later 
Roman  Empire,  that  is  to  say,  all  the  Empire  which  had 
its  capital  in  Constantinople.  They  brought  into  Europe 
a  political  and  social  system  entirely  out  of  harmony 
with  western  civilisation.  While  the  Turks  were  strong, 
all  the  powers  of  Europe  were  banded  together  against 
them,  and  would  have  joined  eagerly  in  any  movement 
which  seemed  likely  to  drive  the  Ottoman  back  into 
Asia.  But  when,  of  later  years,  Turkey  began  to  grow 
weak,  when  her  internal  affairs  became  disorganised, 
when  province  after  province  began  to  show  itself  im- 
pat'ent  of  her  rule,  then  a  new  condition  arose,  which 
not  only  prevented  some  of  the  Western  Powers  from 
desiring  to  see  the  Turks  driven  out  of  Europe,  but  even 
induced  them  to  unite  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining 
them  in  their  possessions.  This  new  condition  was  the 
growth  of  the  Russian  Empire.  Russia  was  becoming 
powerful  as  the  Turks  began  to  grow  weak.  She  was 
eager  to  extend  her  dominions  to  the  south.  The  dread 
which  many  modern  statesmen  felt,  was  that  Russia 
would  make  herself  mistress  of  all  the  provinces  now 
held  by  the  Turks  in  Europe,  and  thus  become  a  far 
greater  danger  to  other  European  Powers  than  the 
Turkish  Empire  in  its  crippled  modern  condition  could 
possibly  be.     Therefore   a  school  of  statesmen  sprang 


1850  The  Eastern  Question.  211 

into  existence,  who  maintained  that  it  was  part  of  tht 
national  duty  and  interest  of  England  to  maintain  thai 
Empire,  and  another  school  came  up  almost  equally 
strong,  whose  doctrine  was  that  the  power  of  the  Sultan 
must  inevitably  crumble  to  pieces,  and  that  we  ought  to 
make  every  preparation  for  its  decay,  by  encouraging 
the  European  provinces  to  form  themselves  into  separate 
and  independent  states.  English  interests,  too,  were 
further  concerned  in  the  condition  of  the  Turks  because 
c'  the  relationship  which  Egypt  holds  at  once  to  the 
Sultan  and  to  England.  It  is  of  the  utmost  importance 
for  England  that  no  foreign  power  should  get  possession 
of  Egypt,  because  Egypt  is  a  necessary  part  of  our  high 
road  to  India.  So  long  as  the  Sultan  holds  Egypt,  and 
the  Sultan  himself  is  to  a  certain  extent  under  the  pro- 
tection of  England,  we  are  sure  Egypt  is  safe.  The 
school  of  statesmen  who  hold  that  it  is  essential  for  our 
interests  to  maintain  the  Ottoman  Empire,  make  it  a 
part  of  their  argument,  that  if  we  do  not  maintain  it,  we 
should  have  to  occupy  Egypt  ourselves,  or  to  submit  to 
its  being  occupied  by  some  foreign  power,  which  might 
perhaps  some  day  stand  between  us  and  our  way  to 
India. 

The  year  1850  did  not  seem  one  of  good  augury  for 
the  progress  of  fret  political  institutions  on  the  Ihiropean 
continent.  The  spirit  of  the  national  party  of  Hungary 
appeared  to  be  crushed.  Foreign  occupation  and  inter- 
vention were  once  more  triumphant  over  the  greater  part 
of  Italy.  The  hopes  which  German  populations  had 
been  forming  of  a  United  Germany,  under  the  leadership 
of  Prussia,  appeared  to  be  blighted.  Prussia  had  fallen  to 
be  a  mere  dependent  or  creature  now  of  Austria  and  now 
of  Russia.  The  manner  in  which  Prussian  politics  were 
made  subservient  to  the  intrigues  of  Russia  filled  the 


212  A  Survey,  Political  and  Social.  1S50 

heart  of  many  a  patriotic  German  with  anger  and  despair, 
and  contributed  not  a  little  to  the  causes  and  influences 
which  afterwards  brought  about  the  Crimean  War.  In 
the  domestic  Government  of  almost  all  the  continental 
States  an  iron  despotism,  a  rigid  police  system  reigned 
supreme.  In  PVance  the  sudden  establishment  of  the 
Republic,  with  its  weaknesses  and  errors,  had  only  served 
to  open  a  way  for  Louis  Napoleon,  nephew  of  the  great 
Napoleon,  and  for  a  long  time  an  exile  in  England,  to  get 
himself  elected  President ;  and  from  the  chair  of  the 
President  he  made  his  way  before  long  to  an  Imperial 
throne.  In  August  1850,  Louis  Philippe,  formerly  King 
of  the  French,  died  at  his  residence  in  England.  A  few 
days  later  the  President  Louis  Napoleon,  at  a  banquet  in 
Cherbourg,  in  France,  was  hailed  with  cries  of  "  Long 
live  the  Emperor."  A  month  later  Louis  Napoleon  was 
reviewing  the  troops  on  the  plain  of  Satory,  near  Paris. 
As  some  of  the  cavalry  regiments  passed  by,  they 
shouted  first  "  Long  live  the  President,"  and  afterwards 
"  Long  live  the  Emperor."  Already  men  began  to  look 
fonvard  with  something  like  certainty  to  the  change 
which  was  about  to  take  place  in  the  Government  of 
France,  and  which  only  a  little  later  was  accomplished 
by  the  memorable  coup  (Tl'tat  o{  December  2,  1851. 

The  wave  of  popular  revolution  seemed  to  have 
wholly  subsided.  Autocratic  rule  appeared  to  have  a 
new  charter  of  life  conferred  upon  it.  Not  since  the 
meeting  of  the  Allied  Sovereigns  at  Verona,  and  the 
publishing  of  the  Holy  Alliance,  had  arbitrary  authority 
seemed  so  securely  established  all  over  continental 
Europe.  Yet  we  have  only  to  look  fonvard  a  little  way 
in  order  to  see  how  the  very  same  sort  of  reaction  which 
followed  the  Holy  Alliance,  followed  the  re-establish- 
ment of  personal  authority  in  Europe.     Before  ver)'  long 


1850  Revived  Autocracy.  213 

Hungary  had  quietly  secured  her  independence.  The 
Austrians  had  to  give  up  Lombardy  in  1859  and  Venetia 
in  1866.  Italy  gradually  became  united  into  one  king- 
dom. Prussia  made  herself  the  predominant  power  in 
Germany.  Austria  was  forced  to  recede  altogether  from 
her  place  in  the  German  system.  The  French  Empire 
fell  in  1870,  and  a  Republic  was  established  in  its  place. 
Meanwhile,  nothing  could  be  more  remarkable  than  the 
contrast  between  the  condition  of  England  and  that  of 
the  Continent.  In  England  there  had  been  no  political 
uprising  of  any  kind  which  could  call  for  a  serious  re- 
action. The  Chartist  disturbances  and  the  momentary 
outbreak  of  revolution  in  Ireland  had  passed  away  with 
comparatively  little  harm  done.  The  progress  which 
political  life  had  been  steadily  making  in  these  islands, 
and  the  certainty  that  what  further  reform  was  yet 
needed  was  to  be  accomplished  best  by  peaceful  means 
and  by  patience,  had  had  their  inevitable  effect.  While 
continental  Europe  was  once  more  broken  up  by  revolt 
and  reaction,  England  was  pursuing  steadily  the  path  of 
peaceful  reform.  While  the  Government  of  Austria  were 
still  executing  some  of  their  Hungarian  rebels,  and  were 
chafing  and  fuming  because  Kossuth,  the  Hungarian 
leader,  h;id  escaped  from  their  power;  while  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  French  Republic  was  silently  arranging  for 
his  coup  (feint,  England,  under  the  inspiration  of  the 
late  Prince  Consort,  was  busily  engaged  in  preparing  for 
the  first  Great  Exhibition  of  the  Works  of  All  Nations, 
to  be  held  in  the  Crystal  Palace  in  Hyde  Park. 

It  was  not,  however,  in  political  affairs  alone  that  these 
islands  had  been  making  s'eady  progress  during  all  this 
time.  Indeed,  it  would  not  be  possible  for  any  people  to 
make  any  advance  in  political  reform  without  making 
social  and  moral  progrci;s  as  well ;  or  perhaps  it  should 


214  A  Survey,  Political  and  Social.  1850 

rather  be  said  that  without  the  growth  of  improvement 
in  inteUigence  and  in  moral  feeling,  the  improvement  in 
politics  could  not  take  place.  It  would  be  impossible  for 
anyone  to  survey  the  lengthened  period  which  we  have 
been  describing  without  being  struck  by  the  steady 
advance  made  in  the  social  condition  of  England.  We 
have  shown  how  many  great  reforms  were  made  in  the 
criminal  laws,  how  the  severity  of  punishments  was  miti- 
gated, and  how  the  mitigation  of  the  penal  code  was 
assisted  further  by  legislation  intended  to  make  life  less 
hard  upon  the  poor,  and,  therefore,  to  give  less  temptation 
to  crime.  The  factory  legislation,  the  laws  for  the  regu- 
lation of  mines  and  collieries — these  were  injprovements 
thoroughly  in  the  spirit  of  the  age.  Society  itself  im- 
proved. At  the  period  with  which  this  history  begins  the 
duelling  system  was  still  a  fashionable  institution.  Not 
only  military  men  and  hot-tempered  youth  settled  their 
quarrels  with  the  pistol,  but  grave  statesmen  and  elderly 
lawyers  had  recourse  to  the  same  means  of  finishing  a 
dispute.  The  Duke  of  Wellington  fought  a  duel  with 
Lord  Winchilsea ;  Sir  Robert  Peel  was  making  arrange- 
ments to  fight  a  duel  with  O'Connell  when  the  interference 
of  friends  brought  the  dispute  to  a  conclusion  ;  Mr.  Dis- 
raeli challenged  one  of  O'Connell's  sons  because 
O'Connell  himself  declined  to  fight.  It  is  in  great 
measure  to  the  influence  of  the  late  Prince  Consort  that 
the  decay  and  final  abandonment  of  the  duelling  system 
in  this  country  is  to  be  ascribed.  Some  singularly  tragic 
and  painful  quarrels,  futile  in  their  original  purpose,  had 
drawn  public  attention  directly  to  the  hideousness  of  the 
practice,  and  the  intervention  at  such  a  timely  moment 
of  the  Prince  Consort,  and  the  use  he  made  of  his  influ- 
ence with  the  military  authorities,  had  much  to  do  in 
helping  forward  the  great  moral  and  social  reform.    The 


1850  The  Duelling  System.  215 

barbarous  amusements  which  during  the  reign  even  of 
William  IV.  were  still  common  among  all  classes,  such 
as  bull-baiting  and  cock-fighting,  have  now  ceased  to  be 
the  pastime  of  even  the  rudest  and  most  ignorant.  We 
do  not  pretend  to  say  that  all  this  advance  has  been  made 
without  some  corresponding  reaction,  but,  taken  on  the 
whole,  a  marked  improvement  in  the  moral  tone  of 
society,  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest,  is  distinctly  to  be 
noted,  and  might  be  proved  almost  by  the  test  of  arith- 
metical figures.  The  numerous  improvements  which  have 
been  made  in  the  drainage  of  cities,  in  the  ventilation  of 
houses,  in  the  providing  of  gardens  and  open  spaces  for  the 
poor  children  of  large  towns  to  play  in  ;  all  these  beneficent 
changes  could  not  fail  to  produce  a  decided  effect  upon  the 
general  health  of  the  population.  The  shocking  habits 
of  drunkenness  which  at  one  time  pervaded  all  classes 
of  men  in  this  country  are  now  confined  mainly  to  the 
uneducated  and  to  the  poor,  whose  rigorous  lot  and  almost 
incessant  toil  makes  temptation  not  easy  to  resist.  It 
may,  moreover,  be  confidently  hoped  that  in  time  a  vice 
which  has  faded  away  from  all  the  more  educated  classes 
cf  society  will  leave  society  altogether,  and  that  the  spread 
of  education  amongst  the  very  poorest  will  bring  sobriety 
with  it. 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

405  Hllgard  Avenue,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


NON-RENE^iaSL 

NOV  0  619)1 
DUE  2  vVKS  FRGf'/i  OMf  RtCr^v^D 

MaV27  fiSI 


IHIUIl  Him  Mill  Mill  I., ,..,.,, umiiriiiB 

A     000  953  714    3 


